course declared an adjournment. On this subject the Morning Chronicle of the 5th. instant contains the following observations.

"The question which stood for discussion yesterday in the house of Commons was not one of those Orders of the day which a certain description of "members feel it to be their bounden duty to attend. Our readers may ob66 serve that any motion purely popular, that has for its object to preserve "the liberty of the press, to restore the rights of fair representation, to "remedy practical abuse, or to punish convicted delinquency, seldom comes into debate on the day announced. At four o'clock it is found "that there are not forty members present! From whence proceeds this "manœuvre? Why should ministers desire to put off a question for a single "day, since they know that it must come on? Because to use a common 66 phrase, 'it throws cold water on the thing.' Expectation is disappointed "--the topic loses its interest-and, after a few days, the motion is stifled "with more facility.There is no single measure of reform that we should "think more favourable to the public interests than a bill to exclude these "underlings of office from parliament, whose only business there is to come "down at four o'clock to make a house, when wanted by the minister-and "who perfectly understand when it is convenient that the house should be "counted out. Half the grievous bills which have deprived the subject not merely of the trial by jury, but even of appeal in revenue matters, and iu "all the teazing 'penalties upon summary convictions, have been passed, "in houses chiefly made up of puisne lords of the treasury and admiralty, "and commis of the other offices of state. There are about thirty such offi"cers that ought to be disqualified from sitting in parliament.- -We need not tell our readers that the order of the day was the promised motion of "Lord FOLKESTONE, on informations ex officio."

These observations are equally just and important; but we cannot help demanding of the writer, whether the "bounden duty" of attending the house of Commons, more especially on questions which seriously affect the rights and liberties of the subject, is confined to the ministerial side of the house? Was it not equally the "bounden duty" of those who profess themselves the friends of the people, and who are proud of the appellation of Whigs, to be at their posts? But it seems that a "question purely popular" possesses as little attraction to the leaders of the OUTS as to those of the INNS; and it is well if, when it is at length brought forward, there be not on the part of the minority the same miserable attendance as has too frequently been the case in both houses during the present session. The editor of the Chronicle justly censures ministers and their " underlings" for their " manoeuvres;" but had he considered the subject impartially, he would also have censured that party of which he is the organ, which seems almost totally to disregard questions "purely popular," although of infinitely greater consequence than those questions which are mere trials of skill and of strength between the contending parties.

We are happy to find, that a person possessing the good underderstanding of the Editor of the Morning Chronicle, has at length

discovered, that there are a number of placemen, the certain tools. of the minister of the day, who ought to be disqualified from sitting in the house of Commons; but we cannot help calling to mind the period, during the Grenville administration, when the columns of the Chronicle abounded in censures the most unjust, and calumnies the most unfounded, against Sir FRANCIS BURDETT, for holding up to the public the very same opinion now held up by the writer in question. We hope, however, that from henceforth he will stick true to his text, and under every administration inculcate the "bounden duty" of its members to watch every opportunity of supporting questions "purely popular," in which are involved the im portant subjects to which he alludes: but we much fear, that whenever such questions come before the two houses, his friends Lords GRENVILLE and GREY, Messrs. PONSONBY, TIERNEY, &c. &c. will be found, if not open enemies to our popular rights, at least neutrals and absentees.

Subsidy to Portugal. - For these three years past we have assisted Portugal, if over-running the country, and spreading that desolation of which we are in the habit of censuring the French, but which desolation we are assured, when committed by the English, is perfectly agreeable to our ally:-For these three years past we have been assisting Portugal with our armies, and have likewise paid one million annually by way of subsidy to the Portugueze troops. This year ministers have thought proper to double the sum, and have accordingly moved for a subsidy of two millions. This not being one of those "purely popular questions," so uninteresting to our party statesmen, but relating to the conduct of the war, and of course somewhat affecting the characters of ministers, ensured the attendance, and drew forth a tolerable speech from Lord Grenville, who exposed the folly of thus lavishing the resources and wasting the strength of this country. His lordship complained of the " utter darkness in which the house were left respect'ing the application" of the doubled subsidy; although his lordship held out some faint hopes, that-" If we could secure some power"ful military co-operation on the continent, the moment may ar"rive when this country shall again successfully resist, and finally "overthrow the common enemy of Europe." He added his firm conviction, that "the struggle could never be carried on single handed, "He therefore gave his decided negative to this motion because he disapproved of the whole system; because three campaigns had more and more shewn its impolicy; because every circumstance was at present adverse to the prolongation of the contest; because he saw that system hastening the country fast into a gulph * of inevitable ruin; and because, although at no time justifiable,

་

4

VOL. IX.

་་

.

"it was brought forward at a time perfectly unparliamentary, before knowing whether the resources of the country were equal to its "exigencies." To this Lord LIVERPOOL replied, by assuring the "house that " Although unquestionably he felt all the warmth and "enthusiasm which the situation of the continent kindled in every "British mind, yet he must declare that the government of this country had not conducted their measures by any views or princi"ples of a romantic character. On the contrary, they had acted on a firm persuasion, that in aiding Spain and Portugal, they were effectually supporting the cause of Great Britain. . . . As to "the question of practicability, he considered experience as its best "test. If the house looked back to the commencement of the con"test in 1793, he believed it impossible to name a conjuncture that "presented a fairer prospect!" Alluding to the short time in which other countries were overrun, his lordship added-" If they looked "to the duration of the war in Spain and Portugal, they found "themselves in the third year of an unremitted struggle. He was "convinced that the mind of the Spanish people was yet uncon"quered, and unconquerable." His lordship concluded by expressing his belief" That nine-tenths of the country would rather con"tinue to sustain the burdens or privations it mignt impose, than "abandon the struggle on the peninsula." The debate on this subject in the Lords, appears to have been conducted in a similar manner in the Commons, excepting that the speech of the leader of the opposition, Mr. PONSONBY was much inferior to that of Lord Grenville, and appears to have been delivered merely for the sake of shewing a little, formal, party opposition, as Mr. P. assured the house," he did not wish for a division, or to give any sort of angry opposition to the measure." In both houses the motion for granting the two millions was carried without a division.*

If the opinion of Lord Liverpool be correct, that "nine-tenths "of the people of Britain would rather continue to sustain the bur"dens and privations they now suffer," and we may add, the farther burdens and privations they must suffer, rather than abandon "the contest in Spain and Portugal," they must be seized with judicial blindness; and if our rulers, and the people at large are thus united in opinion, they are indeed reduced to that unhappy state, in which the blind are leading the blind, and the consequence must inevitably follow :-both will fall into the ditch! Let us briefly examine Lord Liverpool's satement, by his own test, and which we agree with him, is on this subject, the best test―That of EXPERIENCE. "Since the year 1793, the beginning of the war,"

* In this and the preceding article we have followed the reports so ably given in the Morning Chronicle.

we are gravely assured, "that the country never had a fairer prospect "of its successful termination." No-not even at the time, when his lordship, who as well as his coadjutors, "never conducted their measures by any views or principles of a romantic character," with such combined wisdom and courage, proposed that the British army then attempting the invasion of France," should march direct "to Paris!" But what is the obvious lesson enforced on the people of this country after twenty years dear bought experience? That which we for years past, and almost from month to month have been endeavouring to impress on the minds of our countrymenAll the efforts of this country to limit or abridge the dominions and power of France have uniformly ended in their increase! The experience of his lordship at the termination of the first period of the war in 1801, testified, and by his signing the treaty of Amiens, he confessed the fact, that after eight years unparalleled exertions on the part of this country, in which our debts and taxes were doubled, we were compelled to restore to France all her conquests, to leave her in possession of an enormous increase of territory, and of additional and powerful allies; and in short, completely to sacrifice the honour of the British nation, by yielding every one of those objects for the attainment of which we had declared the origin and the perseverance in the war to be just and necessary. And what has been the "experience" of the seven campaigns which form the melancholy history of the second period of the war? The end of every campaign has found the dominions and power of France considerably increased; and although by the most liberal supplies of men and money, we have hitherto prevented the total conquest of Spain and Portugal; whilst we have been spending hundreds of millions in carrying on a war continued, apparently, for no other object than the preservation of these countries; we have not been able to prevent the gigantic strides of the French Emperor in other parts of Europe. But ministers flatter themselves, that because their favourite General, Lord Wellington, has only been driven out of Spain, aud through the greater part of Portugal," the prospect of a successful termination of the contest is fairer than at any period for the past twenty years ;" and we fear that a new victory just obtained by Lieutenant-General Graham, in the Isle de Leon, will have the usual fatal result of such victories,-of gulling the people, and of rendering them more willing than they otherwise would be to persevere in a war for a successful termination of which there is not the least national prospect.

Our State Gazette of the 11th instant, contains extracts of two dispatches from Lord Wellington, giving an account of two defeats, one of our Portuguese, the other of our Spanish ally; the latter appears to have been pretty complete; but to balance these ad

verse events; the Gazette extraordinary of the 25th. contains Lieutenant General Graham's account of an action in which with about 3000 British and 2000 Spanish, he defeated the French The British general it ap army which he computes at 8000 men. pears acting under the direction of the Spanish commander in chief, found himself and his army in a critical situation, in which they were compelled to fight for their own security: the battle was sustained with that bravery which has so often distinguished our countrymen ; "the exhausted but after losing 1200 men, nearly half the army, “ state of the remainder of the troops made pursuit impossible." And in whose cause was this battle fought, in which so much British blood has been shed? Why truly, for a people who in general, from the very commencement of the contest to the present moment, have not thought it worth while even in defence of their independence, to shed their own blood. Our public prints are loud in declaiming against the conduct of the Spanish commander in chief, General LA PENA, who after drawing the British general into a situation the most hazardous, thought it most prudent to stand aloof from the contest with an army of 7,000 men, which if it had been brought into action, (so our journalists assure us)" instead of kil"ling only 3000, not a man of the enemy would have escaped." So that the only fruits of this brilliant victory reaped by our British General, has been the exultation he expresses in detailing the numbers of the French killed and wounded, and viewing (what a glorious sight for a warrior!)" the field of battle covered with the dead bodies and "arms of the enemy." It is scarcely necessary to add, that another such "victory" would complete the destruction of Gen. Graham's army.

So much for Lord Liverpool's "fairest prospect" of a successful termination of the war, which has presented itself ever since the year 1793!-There is indeed another view we might take of this very fair prospect, as it respects our ability to carry on the war. And here a variety of reflections present themselves. The further depreciation of our national bank notes-the rapid increase of our paper circulation—the funding of twelve millons of exchequer bills-the issue of six millions of the same description of paper to support the falling credit of our merchants—a large loan, and a heavy addition to our burdens-These circumstances will doubtless add to the brightness of Lord Liverpool's prospect: but a full view of the fairest prospect which the nation has enjoyed ever since the year "1793," will shortly be taken by the legislature, and on the ensuing month we shall probably be able to congratulate our countrymen on the" unrivalled success and prosperity" which awaits them, and which will doubtless render this country the admiration and the envy of all people in every part of the globe, civilised or uncivilised!

Harlow, March 28, 1811.

B. F.