XXI. sioners, it is superfluous to say, affords only a rot- BOOK ten and treacherous support, whenever a surmise prevails that support is really wanted. In the course of the debate general Burgoyne acknowledged "that he was now convinced the principle of the American war was wrong, though he had not been of that opinion when he engaged in the service. Passion and prejudice and interest were now no more, and reason and observation had led him to a very different conclusion: and he now saw that the American war was only one part of a system levelled against the constitution of this country and the general rights of mankind." Notwithstanding the utmost opposition of the minister, the numbers, on dividing the house, appeared to be 179 in favor of the motion, against 220 who opposed it. This was a majority in which the ministry had little reason to exult. It afresh excited the most sanguine hopes of the public, who, with the exception of the high Tory and prerogative faction, were now perfectly unanimous in their reprobation of the war and its authors. 1781. the army On the 14th of December, two days only after Debate on the motion of sir James Lowther, the army esti-estimates. mates were laid before the house by the secretary at war; from which it appeared that the whole mili tary force required for the year 1782, including the provincial corps serving in America, amounted to 195,000 men. One hundred thousand seamen and 1781. BOOK marines had been already voted by the house. It XXI. was however stated by lord George Germaine, "that the ministry were of opinion, considering the present situation of affairs, and the misfortunes of the war, that it would not be right to continue any longer the plan on which it had hitherto been conducted; and that a fresh army would not be sent to supply the place of that captured at York Town. It was intended only to preserve such posts in America as might facilitate and co-operate with the enterprises of our fleets." The In the debate which ensued, sir George Saville particularly distinguished himself. "At length, then," said this firm and faithful patriot, "we are given to understand that a change is to be made in the MODE of conducting the American war. ministers do not intend to prosecute it in the same manner as before. Why? Because they could not if they would. But it appeared that they were determined to prosecute it with all the feeble efforts of which they were yet capable. Being detained in the country by ill health, he had not heard the king's speech on its first delivery: but when it reached him in his retirement, he had read it with HORROR, announcing as it did the continuance of the present war in its most destructive form. As to the address of that house, in answer to the speech, it was a mere echo without meaning, a futile and empty sound. So servile was the dependence of XXI. 1781. that house on the executive power, and so little so- BOOK licitous were they to conceal their dependence, that if the king's speech had contained the line, 'What beauties does Flora disclose" he doubted not but the address would have filled up the couplet by re 6 peating, How sweet are her smiles upon Tweed!' The ministers had lost the two hands of the empire in the prosecution of this frantic and ineffectual war; by a continuance of it they would risk the head. Such a conduct resembled, if it did not indicate, the violence of insanity. Could the house so far forget their dignity, and relinquish their understanding, as not to resist this madness? Would they intrust lunatics with the management of the public purse? Would they place the sword within their hands, and bid them use it at their DISCRETION?" General Conway declared himself "anxious for a recall of our fleets and armies from America. Of two evils he would choose the least, and submit to the independence of America, rather than persist in the prosecution of so pernicious and ruinous a war. As to the idea now suggested of a war of posts, what garrisons (he asked) would be able to maintain them, when it was well known that even sir Henry Clinton, at New York, did rot consider himself as secure?" Mr. Fox remarked, "that four years ago, after XXI. 1781. BOOK the disaster of Saratoga, the noble lord at the head of affairs had amused the house with the same language. Then the plan of future hostilities was to be differently modified, and the war conducted on a smaller and more contracted scale. On this contracted scale, however, we had lost another great army, besides suffering other grievous defeats and irretrievable calamities." Mr. Pitt reprobated with the utmost force of language, "as a species of obstinacy bordering upon madness, the idea of any further prosecution of the American war, with our fleets opposed by a superior force, and our armies in captivity. He appealed to the whole house, whether every description of men did not detest and execrate the American war, and whether it were uncharitable to implore the Almighty to shower down his vengeance on the men who were the authors of their country's ruin ?" The impression made by the successive speeches of the principal leaders in opposition in this debate was too great to be concealed; but the estimates, as originally moved, were at length voted by a considerable majority. Nearly at this time a petition was presented by the city of London to the king, in which the calamities resulting from the war are stated in terms peculiarly impressive and eloquent. In conclusion XXI. 1781. they say, "We beseech your majesty no longer to BOOK continue in a delusion from which the nation has awakened, and that your majesty will be graciously pleased to relinquish entirely and for ever the plan of reducing our brethren in America by force, And we do further humbly implore your majesty, that your majesty will be graciously pleased to dismiss from your presence and councils all the advisers, both public and secret, of the measures we lament, as a pledge to the world of your majesty's fixed determination to abandon a system incompatible with the interest of the crown and the happiness of your people." censure on Soon after the recess of parliament, Mr. Fox re- Motion of newed his former motion of censure against the the earl of first lord of the admiralty; and such strength had by Mr.Fox. the opposition now acquired, that in a house of near four hundred members it was rejected by a majority of only twenty-two. The unpopularity of the American secretary was so great and manifest, that he now thought it expedient, seeing parlia mentary censures likely to become again in fashion, to resign the seals of that department-and for his eminent services he was by his majesty raised to the dignity of the peerage. But before the great seal was affixed to the patent, the marquis of Carmarthen moved, in the house of peers, "that it was highly derogatory to the honor of that house, that any person laboring under the sentence of a court Sandwich, |