without producing any fact in proof of the allegation, except an arithmetical calculation, which only proved it to be, what needed no proof, unequal. The right honourable gentleman feemed to have confounded the end with the means. Experience had convinced them, that the reprefentation was not inadequate, but that the houfe of commons, conftituted as it was, anfwered all the beneficial purposes that could poffibly be defired. This was cafe in which we might lofe every thing and could gain nothing. The liberty of the country flood in need of no fpeculative fecurity, it could not be better fecured than it was.

a

Mr. Flood having adduced the fupport given in parliament to the American war, contrary to the fenfe of the people, as a proof of the neceffity of a reform, Mr. Wyndham denied, that the continuance of the American war had been owing to the inadequacy of reprefentation; on the contrary, he faid, it was the war of the people: a better proof of which need not be defired, than what had happened to the member for Bristol, a right honourable friend of his (Mr. Burke), who had been turned out for oppofing its continuance. Towards the clofe of that war, which had been undertaken with no better reasons, he was afraid, than the hope of faving themselves by taxing America, a clamour indeed was raifed on account of the expence and ill fuccefs attending it, and the cry was for a reform of reprefentation in parliament, as a remedy for the evils, which the people had at least their, fhare in bringing upon themselves. He had hoped, that the wild notions which were generated during that war, had happily fubfided, never to rife again: and he was forry to find, that, like

a

locufts, they had only lain torpid, and had been brought to life again by the heat and fermentation which prevailed in the affairs of the continent. He was forry to hear them again buzzing abroad, and thought it portended no good to the verdure and beauty of the British constitution.

But if he had approved ever fo much of the right honcurable gentleman's propofition for a parlia-' mentary reform, he fhould object to it on account of the time at which he had thought proper to introduce it. What, he faid, would he advise them to repair their houfe in the hurricane feafon Speculatifts and vifionaries enough were at work in a

neighbouring country; there was project against project, and theory against theory, frontibus adverfis pugnantia; he intreated the house to wait a little for the event, and in the mean time to guard with all poffible care against catching from them the infection.

Mr. Pitt followed Mr. Wyndham, and faid, that after the extraordinary difplay of ingenuity and wifdom which the house had just heard, little remained to be faid upon the merits of the motion. What he fhould Tay, therefore, would relate to the queftion, fo far as he might be thought perfonally concerned in it. He had brought forward, fome years back, a propofition of the fame nature; to which the oppofition had been fuccefsful, though the times. and a variety of other circumstances, were then more favourable than at prefent. The chief objection, then, was, the danger of innovation; and it was a knowledge of the impreffion that argument had made, which rendered him defirous of waiting till fome more favourable moment than the prefent fhould offer itself,

when

when he most certainly fhould again fubmit his ideas upon the fubject to the house; at prefent, unless the right honourable gentleman would confent to withdraw his motion, he fhould move to adjourn. Mr. Pitt declared, that if he were forced to come to a specific vote upon the right honourable gentleman's plan for amending the conftitution, he fhould be against it; and even if it were his own propofition, he fhould act in the fame manner, feeling that the caufe of reform might fuffer difgrace and lofe ground from being brought forward at an improper ino

ment.

Sir James Johnstone contended, that if the propofitions of the right honourable gentleman were complied with, the act of union would be violated, and in that cafe the two countries must be placed in the fame fituation in which they flood before the union, and then the difficulty would be to bring them together again. By the union England was to have 313 members in that houfe, and Scotland 45. If the act of union were diffolved, probably that houfe would think eight members from Scotland enow, but the Scotch parliament might infift upon having 200 at leaft. The parliament had done extremely well for fome years paft; he hoped, therefore, that the right honourable gentleman would fuffer them to try the experiment for another century, and then, if it did not anfwer, he would be glad to fecond his motion.

Mr. Fox argued in favour of the motion; but, at the fame time, candidly faid, that he believed the pinion he fupported was not that

of the majority either within or without the doors of parliament. He dif fered from Mr. Wyndham on the point of the American war, and was of opinion, that had the house of commons been differently confituted at that time, it would have put an end to that war much earlier. Sure alfo he was, that what had happened in 1784, would never, in that cafe, have taken place. He differed totally from Mr. Wyndham in the fentiments he had expreffed relative to France. That gentleman had afed, would any man repair his houfe in the hurricane? Mr. Fox faid, he would be glad to know what feafon was more proper to fet about a rẻpair in, than when an hurricane was near, and might poffibly burft forth? He concluded with declaring, that he thought the reform propofed by Mr. Flood the best of all he had yet heard fuggefted,

Mr. Burke combated the various arguments that had been urged in favour of the motion. He particularly contended, that the people did not with for any reform, and that fuch attempts did not originate with, or-were countenanced by them. He contended, that the American war was a war of the people, and that it was put an end to by the virtue of the houfe of commons, with scarce any interference of the people, and almost without their confent.

Mr. Powis, Mr. Wilberforce, and Mr. Secretary Grenville, fpoke on the fame fide; and Mr. Courtney, Sir Jofeph Mawbey, Mr. Martin, Mr. Duncombe, and others, for the motion. At length Mr. Flood agreed that it should be withdrawn.

VOL. XXXII

[F]

CHAP.

place, he had been given to underftand, that the fpeaker's fees, communibus annis, might be computed, on an average of ten years, at the fum of 1,2327. and on an average of twelve years, at the fum of 1,2661. and that the allowance to the speaker from the exchequer was about 1,680/., fo that putting the two fums together, the emoluments of the fpeaker did not amount to 3000/.*, a fum by no means adequate to the dignity of the office, which he and every member of that house muft wish to fee properly fuftained. It was on this account that the predeceffors of the prefent fpeaker had generally holden places under the crown. Sir Spencer Compton had filled the office of pay-mafter of the army; and Mr. Onflow, a name never to be mentioned in that houfe but with reverence, had been treafurer of the navy. He did not like that the fpeaker of that houfe fhould be under the neceffity of looking for the favours of the crown, and, therefore, he wifhed the house itself to make an adequate provifion for him. He related the following anecdote in confirmation of his argument. When Mr. Onflow was fpeaker, and held the office of treafurer of the navy, upon a warm difcuffion of a certain political point, the queftion came to be decided by the cafting vote of the speaker, which Mr. Onflow gave in oppofition to the court. This conduct was refented by the court party, and the place which he held was thrown in his teeth. Mr. Onflow, being a high-fpirited man, the very next day refigned his

place; and though he held the office of fpeaker for eighteen years afterwards, to the disgrace of the houfe, he received no more than the ufual income, of the amount of which the house was now apprized. The confequence was, that when he refigned, Mr. Onflow must have retired in a very uncomfortable state, indeed, had not the house, aware of the circumftance, and feeling its own credit or difgrace involved in its conduct on the occafion, voted Mr. Onflow a penfion of 3000l. a year.

With regard to fees arifing eut of the bufinefs of the houfe, he thought they fhould be left exactly as they were, as a check upon frivolous applications. If the fees were abolished, the house would be overwhelmed with fuch a deluge of private business, that it would be impoffible to get through the whole of it. With refpect to the other part of the speaker's emoluments, he fhould propofe that fo much might be added out of the finking fund as to make up the whole 5,000l. a year at leaft. Such an addition might be confidered as the price paid for the purchase of the fpeaker's independence; and the public (he conceived) would chearfully pay for a purchase, in which they had fo great an interest.

Having explained what he meant to fuggeft, when the house fhould be in a committee, Mr. Montagu begged leave to addrefs himself perfonally to the chair, and to affure the fpeaker, that he had heard his manly addrefs at the commencement of the feflion with great pleasure, and that

[F2]

he