j The Scots Magazine.| M A R C H , 1 7 4 6 .

P r o c e e d i n g s o f t he Political Club> con tin u ed fro m p . 66.

I The debate upon the quejiion, Whether Adm.Matthews s namefòould be left out o f the addrefs relating to the tria l o f officers con- I cerned in the naval engagement o jf Toa-I Jon? continued.

I The fpeech o f C . Marcius Coriolanus, in [ the charaSler o f Thom as Carew, Efq\

who /poke next.

Mr Prejtden t,Ince we are to addrefs for trials b y

a court-martial, and fince this is all we feem inclined to do at pre- fent, I can fee no good reafon w h y

we Ihould not recommend the Admiral as well as the V ice-A dm iral to that favour ; for I muft confefs, that the condutt o f both ftill feems to me to be a little fufpi- cious. I (hall not aflert, but I very much fufped, that both o f them facrificed in forae refpeft the honour and intereft o f their country to their refentment againft each other; and as the mutual animofity they bore to each other was well known to our minifters, as well as many others, before the Admiral was fent to command our fquadron in the Mediterranean, every judicious man apprehended what has fince happened, when he heard that thofe two Admirals were joined in the fame com mand. It was then faid, that either [he one ought not to have been fent out, or the other ought to have been called home; becaufe it was publickly known, that they bore no good-will to one another. I fhall grant, Sir* that in fuch cafes all perfonal animofities ought to be fufpended, and that men who are employed together in the ferviceof their country, ought to join heartily and fincerely in every thing thatmay tend to their mutual fuccefs, whatever private piques they may have againft one another: but we are all fenfible o f the prevalence of private paflions, and howapt they are to get the better of our pu-

V ql.VIII.

blick affedlions; therefore every wife man will avoid, i f poflible, raifing luch a contention either in his own breaft, or in that o f any other m a n ; efpecially in a cafe where his country may fuffer by the ifTueo f the combat.

For this reafon, Sir, I hope w e fhall proceed a little farther than the addrefs now propofed: I hope, that as foon as this addrefs is agreed to, fome Gentlem an will rife up, and move for an humble addrefs to his M ajefty, that he would be graciouflv pleafed to inform the houfe, who it was that advifed him to join thofe two Gentlemen in the command of our fquadron in the Mediterranean. W ithout any derogation to the capacity o f the A d miral, I may fay, that his M ajefty had fe- veral other Admirals equally capable o f commanding that fquadron ; and, without derogating in the leaft from the character of the V ice-A dm iral, I may fay, that his Majefty had feveral other Vice-Adm irals equally fit to be employed as V ic e -A d m iral o f that fquadron : therefore our m in ifters (hould have advifed his Majefty to give the command to fuch Admirals as had always lived in .friendfhip together, and confequently fuch as might put a confidence in one another’ s conduft and advice ; at leafl they fhould have advifed h im not to join in fuch an important com mand, two Gentlemen, who were know n to be in no degree of friendfhip : and this they ftiould have been the more careful o f doing, becaufe their country has often fuf* fered by the jealoufies and animofities of its chief commanders.

I do not in the leaft queftion the conduct or courage o f either o f thefe G entlemen ; I am perfuaded, they would bothhave done honour to their country, had they been employed in feparate commands: but, Sir, confidering human weaknefs, itwas not to be fuppofed, that they would

O att

1 0 2 Proceedings of the P o l i t i c a l C l u b , March 1746.*%

adtcordially together ; and therefore thofe who advifed his Majeity to employ them in the lame command, were in my opinion, the original authors o f the difap- pointment we have met with. W ho thefe authors were, is what we ought to inquire into ; and this inquiry is, I think, more necefl'ary, and more becoming the dignity o f this houfe, than the inquiry we have been fo long employed about, and are now like to make fo little of. When I fay this, I hope it will not be fuppofed, that I think the inquiry we have made either unneceitary, or unbecoming our dignity. I t is often neceflary to inquire into the conduct of the a&ors, in order to come at the advifers; and by an inquiry into the management of thole who condudled an unfuccefsful enterprize, we may find out, that the misfortune proceeded from the weaknefs, perhaps the wickednefs, of thofe w ho were the advifers. A previous inquiry into the condutt of the a&ors is therefore often neceffary ; but furely we ought not to flop there, when wedifcover that the ill fuccefs o f the a&ors proceeded from fome fault in thofe who were theadvifers. W e may fometimes find it ne- ceffary to inquire into the condudt, and punifh the crimes of thofe who are the underlings in power; efpecially when we find, that a flop has been, or may probab ly be put to the common channels o f national juftice. But this is not fo properly the game at which we are to fly. Our chief bufinefs in this houfe is, to keep a watchful eye over thofe who, under our fovereign, are the firft fprings o f our go vernment, and to make an inquiry into their conduft, as often as we find the leaft Teafon to fufpefl, that they have been prompted by fome private view, to do or advife any thing that was inconliflent with, or o f dangerous confequence to the publick welfare. This, I lay, is cur chief bufinefs; this is our duty : and this duty we are the more obliged to perform, when it appears, that our country has fuf- fered, or is like to fuffer feverely by the mifcondutt or the bad advice given by our minifters.

W h o they were, Sir, that advifed his M a je ft y as to the appointment o f the A d mirals for the Mediterranean fquadron,

I do not k n o w ; but I think it was theproper province o f the Admiralty board, or at lead of the Firlt Lord Comniiffioner o f that board: and if it fhould appear, that he advifed his Majefty to appoint an Admiral and a Vice-Admiral tor that fquadron, who he knew were not upon good terms together; or even if it fhould appear, that he negle&ed to inform his Majefty o f the animofity that fubfifted between them, and of the bad confequencesthat might from thence enfue; Imuftfay, that in the former cafe it was a breach, and in the latter a negleft of his duty, for which he deferves at leaft the cenlureof this houfe. But if it fhould appear, that he faithfully performed his duty, and that his Majefty was prevailed on, by the advice o f fome other minifter, either to fendout the Admiral, or not to call home the Vice A d m ira l; that other minifter, be who he will, deferves fomethin ̂ more than cenfure ; becaufe it is impoflibleto fuppofe, that in giving fuch advice he had a due regard to the fer vice of his country. H e mull have had a greater regard to fome by-end of his own ; which thishoufe will, I hope, be able to difcover:and when that is difcovered, wemaythtu determine what punifhment ought to be inflidled ; for the crime may be aggravated to a very high degree by the motive that induced its being committed.

This, Sir, I thought proper to mention, becaufe I hope it will put an end to the prefent debate. The trying of one or of both Admirals by a court-martial,is a matter of very great indifference to mej and ought, I think, to be fo to every Gentleman in this hòufe. They have been both accufed o f mifcondufl: if both be

1I

guilty, they ought both to be tried and punifhed ; and if either be innocent, it will be an advantage to his charaflerto have a fair trial before thofe who are the moft competent judges of his conduft. I therefore hope, Gentlemen will give over contending about who fhall, or who fhall not be recommended to be tried; that the queftion may be put upon the addrefsas it now ftands, and that we may come as foon as poflible to the queltion I have mentioned. Whether it may be a que-Ition proper to be confidered of in th«

committee,*

committee, 1 fliall not determine; but I am fure it is a queftion that deferves our confideration: and i f it be thought improper for us in this committee, I hope fome Gentleman more able than I am to inforce itf will rife up and move for fuch an inquiry, as foon as our refolutions in this committee are reported, and agreed to by the houfe.

¥be fpeech c/’ Servilius Piifcus, in the cha- rader o f Henry Pelham, Efq;

Mr Prejidentt

I Shall join in opinion with the Hon. Gentleman who fpoke laft, that it is of very little importance whether we ad- drefsfor having one or both Admirals tried by a court-martial; for fuppofing we ad- dreffed for neither, his Majeliy would certainly order both to be tried, if he thought their conduct any way fufpicious. T h e re fore, if we had concluded this inquiry without coming to any refolution, I do not think the publick could thereby have beenany way a fufferer ; but as we have fpent fo much time in an inquiry, which from the beginning I forefaw and foretold [Mag. 1 745, p- 265.] would be fruitlefs, it feems neceffary to do fomething; and for this leafon I did not oppofe the refolutions you have already agreed to, nor (hall I oppofe the addrefs now moved for. This however I muft fay, that if we addrefs for having one Admiral tried by a court- martial, we ought in juftice to addrefs for having both tried ;• becaufe there are as itrong obje&ions made to the conduct of the one as the other. T h e Admiral did fight, ’ tis true, and the Vice Admiral did Dot; but T think it is far from being clear, whether the latter’s not fighting was o w ing to an error in his own, or in his A d miral’ s conduct; and it is plain, that the Vice Admiral would have fought upon the fecond day after the battle, and would have brought the enemy to a fecond engagement, or would have made the v i ctory obtained in the firft much more com- pleat, by obliging them to defert all their crippled (hips, if he had not been prevented by the Admiral’s exprefs and repeated orders for giving over chace. For this reafon, Sir, T muft likewife join with theHon. Gentleman who fpoke lafl, in 0-

pinion, that if we recommend one, weought to recommend both to be tried b y a court martial; but I cannot j >in with the Hon. Gentleman in thinking, that this addrefs ought to be followed by another, to defire, that his Majefty would be gracioufly pleafed to inform us, who it was that advifed him to fend out the A d miral, or not to call the Vice Admiral home.

Upon the leaft reflexion, Sir, I believe every Gentleman mull be convinced, thatfuch a motion would be very improper in this committee ; becauie we have hitherto inquired into nothing but the cor.du£t and behaviour o f the commanders and of- ficers of cur fquadron in the Mediterranean ; confequently, from any thing w e have yet heard or inquired into, there can be no foundation for fuch an extraordinary motion in this committee : and tnere- fore I fliould not give you the trouble at prefent o f hearing my obje&ions aga.nftit, i f it were not, that the bare mentiono f fuch a motion may have a bad effect upon themindsof fome Gentlemen; which, as one of his Majelly’ s iervants, I think myfelf obliged to endeavour to prevent. For this reafon, Sir, I hope you will g ive me leave to offer my reafons why no fuch motion ought to be made, much lefs a- greed to, either upon the report, or upon any other occafion.

In the firlt place, Sir, it would be a moft enormous incroachment upon one o f the chief and mod necefl'ary prerogative? o f the crown, which is the power his M aje- fly has to appoint fuch officers as he thinks fit, to command his armaments both by fea and land. Shculd this houfe once begin to find fault with any fuch appointment, or to cenlure thofe that advifed it, the next ftep would in courfe be, our taking upon us to recommend, or, more properly, to prefcribe, what General the K ing fhould appoint to command his armies, and what Admiral he fhould appoint to command his fquadrons: the dangerous contequence o f which muft be manifeft ; for, in fuch a cafe, a popular General or Admiral might get himfelf placed at the head of our army or navy, whether the King would or no ; and what ufe iuch a General or Admi/al might

O 5 wiakoT ?

4

m ^ A A A A —. » è 4 4 » V V

March 1746. Proceedings of / ^ P o l i t i c a l C l u b T 103

make o f our army or navy, is certainly tobe apprehended, iho’ it cannot be certainly foretold.

W e fhould therefore, Sir, be extremely cautious o f making a precedent for this houfe to incroach upon that prerogative of the crown, by which the K ing is enabled to appoint what Generals or A dm irals he thinks moil proper for the command of his armies or fquadrons; for, a precedent being once made, efpecially a bad one, it is eafy to improve it. T h e confequence of the precedent now mentioned, might very probably be, our taking upon us to recommend what Generals or Admirals the K ing fhould employ, and to recommend them in fuch a manner, as that the King muft either appoint the G e neral and Admiral fo recommended, or expedt no money, either to raife an army or to fit out a fquadron ; and the natural confequence o f this would be, that inftead o f a legal government, and a rightful King, the nation would foon again be faddled, as it was once already, with a military government and a tyrannicalProteflor.

But, Sir, the addrefs which the Hon. Gentleman has been pleafed to recommend, would be fomething more than an incroachment upon the prerogative of thecrown : in my opinion, it would be a per- fonal affront to our prefent fovereign. As to the inferior officers o f the army or navy, the King may without any affront, be fup- pofed to follow the advice o f fome o f his minifters, with refpeft to their preferment; becaufe he cannot be fuppofed to be per- fonally acquainted with many of them, or to know the qualifications or merit of the refpeèìive candidates: but as to the chief commanders both o f our army and navy, the King muft be fuppofed to know them perfectly; and therefore it would be an affront to our fovereign to fupp'ofe, that with refpett to the appointment o f a- ny Generals or Admirals, he blindiy followed the advice of any minifter: yet this is what we muft fuppofe, before we can agree to fuch #n addrefs as the Hon. Gentleman has been pleafed to mention ; for furely no man would prcpofe to addrefs the King, to know by whofe advice?n y thing had been done, if he fuppofed

it to have been done by him without the advice or recommendation of any mioifter or counfellor whatever. Soppofe then fuch addrefs agreed to, and prefented to his Majefty, what other anfwer could we expert, than that his Majefty had, without any advice, appointed the Admiraland Vice-Admiral of this fquadron, becaufe he knew both the Gentlemen, and from his own knowledge was convinced that both of them were properly qualified for the commands he had refpettively in* trufted them with ? This, I fay, ij the only anfwer we could expeft: and upoa j this anfwer could we proceed to cenfure or punifh any one of our minifters?

I muft therefore conclude, Sir, that fuchan addrefs would not only be of dangerooj confequence, but of no fignification with refpeft to the end propofed; confequent* ly, no fuch addrefs ought to be agreed to, even tho* we had a folid foundation for finding fault with the choice his Majefty made o f an Admiral and Vice Admiral to command his fquadron in the Mediter- ranean. But, Sir, fo far as I have yet heard, we have not the leaft reafon tofind fault with this choice. It has beeno f all fides granted, that both the Gentle*men were properly qualified. The only reafon afligned, is a fuppofed previous a* nimofity or grudge between thefe two Gentlemen. But have we heard any proof of this in the whole courfe of the evidence ? I fhall grant, that the Admi- ral, from the time .of his firft arrival in the Mediterranean, did not treat his Vice- Admiral in fo friendly a manner as might have been expected ; but it has been pro* ved, that, during the whole time of their continuance together, the Vice Admiral behaved with the utmoft decency and re- fpett towards the Admiral. Therefore, if there was any old grudge, it feems to have been of one fide only; or, that o- therwife the Vice-Admiral was willing to have facrificed it to the fervice of hisCountry.

But, Sir, we have had no proof that there was any jold grudge of either fide: and fuppofe we had, it could be no reafon for our inquiring into the conduft of our minifters, with refpeft to the choicehis Majefty made of thefe two Gentlemen

19

104 Proceedings o f the P o l i t i c a l C l u b . March 1746,f t A • A A è « ^ A • 4 A .

» to command his fquadron, unlefs it had been proved, that, previous to that choice, our minillers were informed of the bad

) terms on which thefe two Gentlemen flood with one another. Have we had the lealt pmof, have we heard the lead

i infinnation, that our minilters had any i fucli previous information? It has indeed I been faid, tf>at it was publickly known,

that the Admiral and Vice-Admiral were upon no good terms: but if this were granted, it is no proof o f its having been

I known to our minifters; for a faft may be I publickly known among the inferior fort

of people, and yet may never come to the knowledge of thofe who are in the high

i ftations of life. T h is therefore can be ; no good foundation for our inquiring in

to the conduit o f our minifters ; nor can we from thence fuppofe, that any o f them have been guilty either o f a negleit or a

. breach of duty. And there is nothing we A fhould more carefully avoid, than that of

fetting up inquiries when no crime has k been committed, or when there is not at [ lealt a probability o f our being able to

make a full and ample difcovery: for whena parliamentary inquiry is fet on foot, the people without doors fuppofe, that fome heinous crime has been committed, and

[ expett to fee the criminals condignly pu- rifhed. This they expeft from all par-

nentary inquiries; this they have reafon to expeft: and when they find them- felves difappointed, they are apt to draw conclufions no way favourable to the cha- rafler of this aflembly.

For the fake therefore of preferving our ! dignity, and our authority among the peo- ! pie without doors, we fhould take care ! not to raife the expectations o f the people,

by fetting on foot a parliamentary inquiry, unlefs we have good reafon to believe, that we (hall be able to detedl the publick criminals, and to bring them to condign punifhment ; and the inquiry we are now about to conclude, ought to be a warning to us, not to intermeddle in an affair we cannot comprehend, or in any one that from the nature o f things appears to be beyond our reach : for no Gentleman, I believe, fuppofes, that the refolutions we have come to, or the addrefs now proposed, can give fatisfa&ion to the people

without doors; ,and yet every one of us within doors muft fee, that it is impofli- ble for us, with anyjuitice, to proceed farther than we have done in this affair.T h e event would be the fame, fhould we order another inquiry into the conduct o f our minifters, in relation to the appointing o f thefe two Gentlemen to commandhis Majefty’ s fquadron in the Mediterra* nean : for fuppofing it fully proved, that our minifters had a previous information o f the animofxty, gfudge, or pique, fub- lifting between them, I do not fee how we could proceed even to cenfure any o f our minifters, fhould his Majelty give us fuch an anfwer as I have mentioned, and (hewn to be the only anfwer we can expert.

A n inquiry into the conduft o f minifters, efpecially when any misfortune ordifappointment has happened to the nati- on, is, I know, Sir, a favourable topick both within doors and without. W e are at all times but too apt to give ear to a- ny propolition o f this kind ; but the reafons I have given, will, I hope, put a ftop to any motion, either now or hereafter,for fuch an inquiry as the Hon.Gentleman has been pleafed to mention; and if any fuch motion fhould be made, I hope fuch additional reafons will then be offered, as may prevent its meeting with any favourable reception from this affembly.

The fpeech o /C . Hoftilius Tcrbulus, in the character o f Mr Alderman Heathcote, the I aft publifhed o f this debate.

M r Prejident,

W ith regard to the queftion now properly before us, I fhall content my* felf with giving my opinion in the mofi

common way, by a fingle monofyllable ; but with regard to the queftion which my Hon. friend has ftarted upon this occafion, the Hon. Gentleman who fpoke laft has, I think, made it neceffary for me to give m y opinion in a more extenfive and explicit manner. W hen I fay this, every Gentleman will fuppofe, I mean the queftion for addrefling his Majeity to know, who it was that advifed him to employ two G e n tlemen, as Admiral and Vice-Admiral o f his Mediterranean fquadron, who had fuchan antipathy to one another, that no cor-

dial

I

March1746. Proceedings o f the P o l 1 t 1 c a l C lu b . 1051 i ^ « % % » » « « j *

dial union, even for the publick fervice, could well be expedled between them.T his , I fay, Sir, we have a right to know; this we ought to infill on ; becaufe, I am convinced, it was the caufe of the whole mifcondufl both in the engagement off Toulon, and in what happened afterthat engagement. But fuppofe no mif- fortune had happened in confequence of that choice o f Admirals, will any one fay, it was a good choice ? Could any thing but neceffity excufe fuch a choice ? and can it be faid, that his Majefty was under any neceffity, when he had fo many Ad- spirals and Vice-Admirals equally fit for the command ? Sir, it was a moft unnecessary and a moft imprudent choice: and one o f the chief excellencies o f our confti- tution is, that i f our fovereign does any thing amifs, the blame muft lie at the door o f fome o f his minifters or under agents j who may be called to account, and pu- niftied for it, by an inquiry or profecution in parliament.

N o Gentleman who underftands, and *

properly confiders the nature of our happy conftitution, can pretend to fay, that his Majefty can do any thing, or iffue any orders, inftruttions or commiffion, without the concurrence of fome o f his mini- Iters. If he fhould, thofe that obeyed fuch orders or inftrudlions, or accepted of fuch commiffion, would be anfwerable to, and might be punifhed by parliament for what they did. In the prefent cafe, fuppofe his Majefty fhould return fuch an anfwer to our addrefs, as the Hon. Gentleman has faid to be the only anfwer we can expett ; fuppofe his Majefty in his anfwer fhould fay, that he had made this choice of an Admiral and Vice-Admiral without the advice o f any minifter: could this put a Hop to our inquiry ? No, Sir. W e know, that both the Admiral’s and the Vice- Admiral’s commiffion, as well as inftru- tìions, muft be made out at the Admiralty-board ; and if commiffions be granted toimproper perfons, the Commiffioners of that board are anfwerable to this houfe, and muft bear the blame, unlefs they can ijx it upon the back o f fome other mini- iler or minifters. I f they did fo, it might plead an alleviation o f their puniihment;t u t not an abfoluce indem nity; becaufe

no minifter, nor all the reft of the minifters together, could have compelled them to make out commiffions to improper perfons. Such an anfvver therefore from his Majefty could not put a ftop to ourinqui. ry : on the contrary, it might, and indeed ought to irritate our proceedings againftthe Commiffioners of the Admiralty, whoby fuch an anfwer would become the pro* per and the only objefts of our refent- ment. But I have reafon to think, that no minifter could have influence enough upon his Majefty, to prevail with him to return fuch an anfwer; becaufe I am per- fuaded that his Majefty never refolves up. on any thing of fuch importance without, firft confulting with his minifters; and I am very fure that no minifter ever did, nor can ever prevail upon him to difTem- ble, much lefs to make fuch an anfwer aiis not ftri&ly true.

W e may therefore expeft from his Majefty a true information; and it is far from being an affront to fuppofe, that he appoints even a chief commander by the advice of his council, or by the advice ofhis Admiralty-board. His Majefty maybe perfonally acquainted with all his fa- perior officers both by fea and land; buthe cannot be fuppofed to be acquainted with all thofe circumftances of their life and converfation, which are receffary for forming a right judgment. For example, may we not fuppofe, that his Majeity knew nothing of the antipathy that fub* filled between the two Gentlemen he had made choice of for commanding his Mediterranean fquadron ? Is not fuch a fup» pofition highly probable * Would it not then have been right in his Majefty to have taken the advice of his miniilers, be-

%

fore he proceeded to fuch a choice ? And can it be looked on as an affront to our fovereign, to fuppofe that he did what was right ? But fuppofe he had proceeded to this choice, without any advice, and without knowing any thing of this circum- ftance relating to the two Gentlemen he had honoured with his choice, it was the duty o f the Admiralty.board to inform him, and it was their bufinefs to know the fadl. If they failed in their duty, or were ignorant of what it was their bufinefs tokn ow , they deferve to be cenfured; and

it

106 Proceedings of the P o l i t i c a l C lu b . Marchi746.

it 19 our duty to take care, they may meet with what they deferve, that it may be a warning to others, to be more diligent inperforming their duty, as well as in qualifying themfelves properly for the performance o f their duty.

When we come to inquire into this affair, the Commiffioners o f the Admiralty may perhaps be able to (hew, that they informed his Majefty o f this circumftance relating to the two Gentlemen he hadmade choice of, and that they properly leprefented the dangerous confequences of employing them in the fame command ; but that ic was carried againft their a d vice by the weight o f forne other advifers, whom they may be able to point out to us, if it could be fuppofed that his M ajefty Ihould refufe to name them. T h is I {hall grant, Sir, would in a great meafure excufe the Commiffioners o f the Admiralty; but it would very much aggravate the guilt of thofe who, notwithftanding fuch information, had advifed his Majefty to make fuch a choice. By an inquiry therefore into this affair, we can hardly mifs of laying the blame at the right door. Itmuft lie at the door of the Commiffioners of our Admiralty, unlefs they can remove it to the door of fome other advifers; and confidering the fatal confequence that has enfued from this imprudent choice, we are, in duty to our country, obliged to find out and punifh the advifers.

I am not at all furprifed, Sir, to hear the prerogatives o f the crown trumpt up as a bar to any inquiry ; for they have always been fet up by minifters againft e- very inquiry or profecution that was ever propofed in parliament: but this can never be of any weight with thofe who can properly diftinguifh between the prerogatives of the crown, and the privileges c f parliament. T h e prerogatives o f the crown, Sir, were all eftablifhed by our conftitution for the publick good ; and when they are properly made ufe of, the parliament has nothing to do with th e m ; but when they are made a wicked or an imprudent ufe of, the parliament has then a right to interpofe, and to punifh thofe who advifed the King to make fuch an ufe of his prerogative. Thus the Kinghas by his prerogative the foie pow er of

appointing all commanders both by fea and land; and while proper perfons are employed, the parliament has no right to intermeddle: but when improper perfons are appointed, and the publick has fuffer- ed, or is like to fuiffer, the parliament has a right to interpofe ; and not only to remove the worthlefs perfons fo appointed, but to punifh thofe who advifed the appointing o f fuch. But, fays the Hon.Gen**tleman, if we once begin to inquire into-, and punifh thofe who advifed the appointing o f any General or Admiral, we (hall o f courfe foon begin to affume to ourfelves the power o f appointing Generals and A d mirals. I wilh the Hon. Gentleman would reconfider this argum ent: i f he does, he will find it to be in fhort thus: If we do what we have a right to do, w e fhall o f courfe foon begin to do what we have no right to do. T h is may be Iogick among minifters o f ftate; but I am fure it would not be allowed to pafs for fuch among the under graduates o f any o f our univerfities. By this method of arguing. Sir, we fhould put an end to one o f the chief ufes o f parliaments; which is, to take care that none of the prerogatives o f the crown, which were all deligned for the fafety o f the people, (hall ever be turned towards their deftruftion. But how- ever much this method o f arguing m ay prevail among minifters o f ftate, I hope it will never be admitted by this aflembly. Here I hope the ancient maxim of our conftitution will always prevail, T h a t the K ing has many prerogatives to do good, but not fo much as one to do evil.

N o w , Sir, with regard to the foundation or the reafons we may have for pre* fenting fuch an addrefs as my Hon. friend was pleafed to mention : I fhall grant, we have no direft proof, that there was any animofity or antipathy fubfifting between the two Gentlemen, when his Majefty made choice of them to command his fquadron in the Mediterranean ; but the faft was as that time notorioufly known, and publickly talked o f ; and i f we (hould enter into an inquiry, we may very probably find not only a proof of the faft, but that it was known to almoft all our minifters. This o f its having been publickly talked of, is a fufiicient foundation for

!March 1746. Proceedings of the P o l i t i c a l C l u b. 107

l o $ * Proceedings o f the P o l i t i c a l C l u b . March 1746,an inquiry; and what was then talked of, feems to have been confirmed by the behaviour of the two Gentlemen towards cne another, as foon as they met, and during the whole time of their continuance together, in the Mediterranean. T h e Vice-Admiral, by what appears, feems indeed to have been the moil a rt fu l; becaufe, in all points o f ceremony, he behaved with an outward fhew o f refpedt. But this fort o f behaviour often ferves as a cloak for a heart full of malice and revenge : and if it fhould appear, that he ought to have clofed the line before bringing to, the night before the engagement, or that he could have come up next day time enough to have had a (hare in the engagement, I ftiall fuppofe, that he fe- cretly refolved to endeavour, as much as he could with any fafcty to himfelf, to make the Admiral lofe either his character or his life. On the other hand, if it fhould appear, that our fquadron might have come up with the enemy, the fecond day after the engagement, I fhall be very apt to fuppofe, that the Admiral called the Vice Admiral cfF the chace, to prevent his gaining the honour o f forcing the enemy to a new engagement* or obliging them todefert their crippled fhips.

Then, Sir, as to the knowledge our mi- nifters might have o f the terms on which thefe two Gentlemen flood with refpedt to one another, I (hall admit, that we have no direft proof of their knowledge: but as the faft was notorioufly known and publickly talked of at the time, we have a ftrong prefumption that they were not ignorant of i t ; and a ftrong prefumption o f guilt has always been held to be a fufficient foundation for an inquiry.But with refpeft to the Lords Commiffioners of the Admiralty, we have fome- thing more. As I have fàid before, it was their bufinefs to know this f a t t : the duty o f their office requires, that they fhould inform themfelves very minutely, of every thing that relates to the character or cicumftances o f any officer they are to recommend to a high command in the. navy. W ith regard to them, therefore, we have not only a foundation for an inquiry, but already a!molt a full proof, thatthey have either failed in their duty, or

have been ignorant of what it was theii i bufinefs to know. Confequently, inthiii inquiry we have no realon to apprehend Iour not being able to anfwer the juilex*!pe&ations o f the people without doors;! becaufe the blame mutt fall upon the Lord) j o f the Admiralty, if they cannot remove jit from themfelves, by charging it onfomc I o f our other minifters. I

But the truth, I believe, is, Sir, and will Iperhaps appear to be, that, as we have it prefent two fets o f minifters, verydiftinft from one another, and often contending which (hall appear to have the greatell influence in the cabinet, the Admiral was | recommended by one fet, and the otherfet, in order to preferve their credit with their party, infifted up^n their friend the I V ice-A dm iral’s being continued in com* mand ; tbo* they could not but fee, if they can ever fee any thing, that the pu< blick fervice might fuffer by fuch an ill* I judged and unnatural conjunction. If j this tliould appear to be the cafe, the by* 1end o f thofe who advifed the continuance of the V ice Admiral in that command I will be manifeft. Without any further proof we muft conclude, that they facrifi* * ced the publick fervice to the prefervation of their credit with their party; and that for this purpofe they went out of their proper province, which is an aggravation of their crime ; for it is the proper province o f the Admiralty-board to advife his Majefty with regard to the placing, difplacing, or ftationing all the Admirals and officers of the navy. If any bad choice be made, they are anfwerable for i t ; and i f it ihould appear, that they ad* vifed againft the choice that was made, and duly reprefented the dangerous con- fequences of making fuch a choice, it will be a farther addition to the guilt of thofe who for their own by-ends advifed it.

From hence, Sir, we rouft fee the ne-ceflity of our making fuch an inquiry as m y H on . friend has mentioned, if we are relolved to perform the duty we owe both to our King and country; and that inquiry muft be begun by a motion for fuch an addrefs as he has propofed. Whether it be proper in this committee to refolve up* on the making o f fuch a motion, is another queftion i but it is a qucftion that,

in

I

A

I March 174-6. Proceedings - o f the P o l i t i c o l C lu b . 109[in my opinion, can admit o f no difpute.; What was this committee appointed for ?I Look on the order for this purpofe: is it I not in thefe words, That it be referred to a committee, to inquire into the caufe o f the mi[carriage o f his Majefty s fleet in the aSii-

| on laft year near Toulon, in the Mediterranean, againft the combineà fleets o f Franceand Spain P [Mag. 1745, p. 95 ] If any

[onethinks I have not repeated the words faithfully, I fhall defire the order to beread at your table.-----As thefe are admit •ted to be the words o f the order, is it not plain, that if we think,‘ the caufe o f this

, mifcarriage was ultimately owing to his I Majefty’s making choice of two Admirals

for the command o f that fquadron, who had a contempt and an averiion for oneanother: I fay, if this be our opinion, is it not plain, that in this committee we have not only a power, but we ought to refolve, that this choice was the ultimate caufe of the mifcarriage ? And, confe- quently, we have a power, and ought to direft our chairman to move the houfe for fuch an addrefs as my Hon. friend has been pleafed to propofe.

I therefore hope, Sir, that nothing that has been faid by the Hon. Gentleman who fpoke laft, will prejudice any member of this houfe againft fuch a motion, or make any one think, that it is improper for this committee to direft our chairman to make fuch a motion. I think indeed we fhould firft refolve, that his Majefty’s making choice of two fuch Admirals was the ultimate caufe, or one o f the chief caufes of the mifcarriage o f his fleet in that aftion. To fuch a refolution I fhall moft heartily give my affent; becaufe I am fully convinced, that if there had been any fort of harmony between our Admiral and Vice- Admiral, we fhould that day have obtained a moft compleat v if to ry : nay, I am perfuaded, we Ihould have almoft totally deftroyed both the French and Spanifh fqùadrons; for as the wind then flood, they had no port of fafety to retreat to, within lefs than two days fail. Our coming to fuqh a refolution can be no ex- cufe for either of the Admirals, if it fhould appear, that either of them was guilty o f any breach or negleft o f duty ; becaufe whatever terms they flood on with re-

V o U V I I I .*

4

fpeft to one another, they fhould havejoined cordially and fincerely together in fighting and deftroying the enemies o ftheir country. I f they had done -fo, itmight have been a cover for thofe who had advifed employing them in the fame command ; but it could never have jufti- fied the choice : and, now that choice has produced fuch fatal eff.fts, we are bound to inquire into the advifers; I hope we fhall be able to bring them to condign punifhment, whatever methods they may take to fhelter themfelves behind the throne.

The jubjiance o f feveral fpeeches made, on the 30th o f April 1745, in the debate upon the motion relating to the proceedings {o fthe court-martial held on Capt. RichardNorris.

The fpeech o f A. Cornelius Ccflus, in tht character o f Velters Cornwall, Efq\

Mr Prefident ,

1 C a n n o t but obferve, Sir, that you

yourfelf, and many Gentlemen near me, feem in a manner to call me up*

after what happened the latter end o f the laft week on this occafion, when I offered you a queftion, which I had framed in the beft manner I was able, from the de- pofitions and minutes fent us out o f the Mediterranean, of Capt. Norris’s tria!, which the committee then read, and o f which the houfe has appointed this day to confide r.

And indeed I fhould otherwife have thought it my duty to fay fomething at prefent, (his Majefty beirg in hafte to prorogue us, and to vifit his German dominions), that I might take a properleave o f this inquiry, of which I happened to be one of the firft parents: and tho*I well remember, that on the original motion for the houfe to refolve itfelf into a committe on the fight off Toulon, fome Gentlemen debated point-black a- gainft it, others were for a previous que- ilion, and others defired me to withdraw i t ; yet it worked its own way thro* the houfe, after the manner that fame is described to do ; motion ma^e it flourifh sand the farther it went, ihe ftronger it grew : for it might otherwife have failed,iron) the inability o f your chaiiman.

P A n d

n o Proceedings of the P o l i t i c a l C lu b , March1746.And it being now. Sir, grown too big

to be maintained otherwife than by the Royal hand, I hope his Majefty will take it under his own care, and will by thismeans obtain the popularity of reltoring to us that courage and difciplire which have, in all ages but the prefent, made the fleets of this ifland the terror of its enemies. What mull foon be the fate o f this nation when military merit is no longer the way to military preferment ? Pray, Sir, is not this verified in the cafe before us, where, after the pufillanimous behaviour o f many of our commanders in that molt critical conjuncture, a court- martial, fitting on the mock-trial (for fo I jnuft call it) of one c f the greateft cowards that this or any other country ever produced, combines, and confpires with the criminal to let him flip thro’ their fingers; and for no other reafon than this, that, truly, they hear his father is at the head c f the Admiralty ?

T h e Admiral who lately commandedthere, and is now your member, abufesthe Lieutenants of the ElTex for complaining of the cowardice of their Captain in the adlion, and advifes Norris to quit. H e does fo, and enters himfelf a voluntier. Then he defires Mr Rowley to hold a court-martial upon him, that he may clear himfelf o f the afperfions that have been cafl upon him. Mr Rowley fends home his letter to the Lords o f the Admiralty, and doubts his power of trying one who had given up his command. T hey order him to be tried. Upon which a court- martial is held ; to which Mr Norris is invited rather than fummoned, and defired to accufe thofe who have afperfed him : he appears there no more like a prifoner than any member of the court- martial ; walks in and out with his fword on ; is under no arreft ; the Lieutenants o f his fhip allowed only to fend in depo- fitions, and not admitted to appear at the trial, which iafted eight d a y s ; and the common failors kept drunk, and fuborned to fwear falfely in favour of Norris; when

•the Lieutenants of the poor Marlborough came on board the fhip where the court- martial is held, and defired by letter to be admitted to be examined, the court isunanimouily of opinion, that they ihould 1

not be heard, becaufe they famed to haw prejudged the cafe; nor are the three Lieutenants o f the Effex allowed to make good their charge.

I fhould obferve too, that Capt. Norris does not only govern the court as he plea* fes, and afk more than three fourths ofthe queftions; but brow-beats every bodyhe diilikes, and afks the famequeflionsofrecrimination over ten thoulard times, «w«. Was not my lhip as near the enemy as the Dorfetfhire, and others that never fought at all ? & c. & c. Nor fhould I forget the great complaifance of the fuppo- fed profecutor on the part of the crown; which, I am told, was the Admiral’s Se* cretary ; who always addrefiès himfelf toCapt. Norris, to know what he would bepleafed to have done, and takes care in hit ftyle throughout the whole, to fay, “ Capt. Norris and the court proceeded, or did foand fo ?

And now, Sir, by way of farce, after this tragi-comedy, our pious court martial refumes the former doubt, which had been long before fent home, and overruled by the Lords of the Admiralty; andthey all fign in an opinion, that they can* not try (even after they have tried him) Capt. Norris, he having no pay from, or command under the government. But, notwithrtanding all I have faid, I hope there may be Gentlemen in the houfe who may have letters from the Mediterranean, that will fet many of the members of th is court-martial in a better light; and it has been whifpered without doors, that the Admiral and three or four of the court differed with the majority : and altho’ Ibelieve it is a maxim in law, That there can be no averment againft a record; yet I hope that i f any Gentleman can produce fuch a letter, the committee will give him ̂leave to read it as a part of his fpeech, that it may avail fomewhat towards the taking off fome of the odium from thofe who thereby endeavour to exculpate them- felves from the parliamentary cenfure which my general queftion carries along with it.

M y queflion, however, Sir, is at prefent warranted by the evidence on your table ; and will, I am fure, be fupportedby much abler arguments than any I have

troubled

t

!troubled you with ; fo that I proceed to

: move you, cfbat the proceedings o f the court-' martial ajjembled on board his Ma jefty s

jhip Torbay, begun the 2$th o f January 1744, and ending the y k o f February fo llowing, purjuant to an order from the Com~ miffioners for executing the office o f Lord High Admiral o f Great Britain , bearing date the 2$th o f November 174.4, to Vice- Adm. Rowley, for inquiring into the conduEl and behaviour o f Capt. Richard Norris, in the engagement between the Englijh fleet, under the command o f Adm. Matthews, and the united fleets o f France and Spain, in the Mediterranean, on the 11 th o f February 1743, were partial, arbitrary, and illegal.

*Ihe fpeech 0/Horatius Codes, in the character o f Sir John Hynd Cotton, who fpoke next.

Mr P r e f dent,

A S I had heard a great many repeated accounts o f the infamous behaviour of this unfortunate Gentleman in the engagement off Toulon, I was for many months amazed that I never heard o f his having been tried by a court-martial j and, at laft, when I heard he had been tried, and, as it was firft reported, acquitted, I began to doubt the veracity o f the accounts I had before heard. But now, after having feen the proceedings o f that court-martial, I am more amazed than e- ver. I am aftoniftied, that men who call themfelves Gentlemen, fhould, for thefake of gaining the favour or countenance of any great man, falfify their oaths, and join in an attempt to fcreen fuch a cow ardly behaviour from that punifhment which is ufually and juftly inflicted upon it by our military law. It is a moft terrible difappointment and difcouragement to our brave feamen, to find themfelves under the command o f a cowardly Captain; but what indignation muft they not be filled with, what defpair mull they not be drove to, when they fee that Captain protected by their Admiral, and fcreened by the mock lolemnity o f a court martial ? If an immediate flop be not put to fuch pra&ices, we can no longer expeCt either glory or fafety from our navy : no brave man will ever enter into the fervice, be-caufe he mult expeCt the face o l C a p t .

C o rn w a ll : he muft expeCt to be facrificed by the cowardice o f his companion? In this aftair, therefore, I hope all party di- vifions, all minifterial evafions, will be entirely laid afide. Our lives, our liberties, and our properties, as well as the honour and glory o f our country, are at i tak e: and the interpolation of this houfe is the more neceflary, becaufe, during the long traCt of peace we have lately had, feveral young Lords, or fons of great families, have taken it into their head to become feamen, and may expeCt the fame partiality from a court-martial, which they feethis young Captain has met with.

This houfe has, Sir, for many years been fo much under the guidance o f minifters, that we may in fome meafure be faid to have loft, by difufe, feveral of thofe powers which we are inverted with by our conftitution. T hank G od! fince this parliament began, vve feem to be got a little out o f our leading flings ; and therefore I hope vve fliall begin to interrupt that prefcription which might otherwife perhaps, in a fhort time be pleaded againft us. Upon this occafion I muft remind Gentlemen, that we have, among others, a power to infpeCt the proceedings of all courts of jultice; as is evident from our grand committees eftablilhed at the beginning of every fefiion, one of which, in particular, is for our courts o f juftice: for tho* this committee has for many years never once fat to do any bufinefs, yet the annual eftablifhment o f fuch a committee is a proof that we have a right, and that we ought to infpeCt the proceedings of all courts o f jultice; and the proceedings o f this court-martial is a proof o f its beingnow become necefiary for us to exert that right, more punctually than we have done for many years part.

Sir, I believe there was never in thi*3 world a court of juftice that proceeded ia fuch an unjult and partial manner. From the very day of the engagement, there feems to have been a combination among the officers o f that fquadron, from the highelt to the loweft, to lcreen one another, or at leaft all but the Vice-Admiral, from the refentment o f their country, for their cowardice, and negleCt o f duty. I fw e confider how little molt o f our fhips

F z fuffer-

March1746. Proceedings o f the P o l i t i c a l C l u b . i n

iuttered, it is from thence evident, without any proof, that they did not attack the enemy with that vigour and bravery, with which, as Eoglifhmen, they ought to have done. From this charge indeed I niuft exempt the Admiral, and his fecond, the unfortunate Captain o f the Marlborough ; and I am lorry I cannot exempt the Admiral from the other charge, of endeavouring to fcreen fome of the C aptains under his command, particularlythe Captain of the Eflex, whofe condud is now under our confideration. Confider- ing the ftation of that fhip in the line, and the little damage fhe fufFered, it was ev ident, without any proof, that the Captain had avoided coming to a clofe engagement with any one o f the enemy. This was confirmed by the general voice of al- moft all the {hips of the fquadron ; andyet the Admiral never thought of doing juftice to his country, by bringing this Captain to a trial. A t laft, a diredt charge was laid againft him by his Second Lieutenant. But this too was overlooked by the A d m ira l; tho' it had, it feems, fuch an effedi upon the Captain as to make him refign the command of his fhip : and this,

. it feems, was thought a fufficient atonement for betraying his country by his cosvardice in the time o f a&ion ; for no thoughts were ever afterwards had o f bringing him to a trial, till the Captain was advifed by his friends, and encouraged, I fuppofe, by the protection he met with, to apply, in the September following, for a trial, in order to remove that infamy which malice and faliliood, as he faid, had thrown upon him.

T h e next fucceeding Admiral, being unwilling, I fuppofe, Sir, to incur any private odium by condemning him, or the publick odium by acquitting him, made a doubt whether he could order him to be tried, as he had then no command in the fquadron, without an order from the board o f Admiralty; which he at laft received on the 5th of January laft, diredling him to aflemble a court-martial, to inquire into that Captain’s conduft in the engagement which had happened near a twelvemonth before: and in purfuance of this order a court-martial was afTembled for thispurpofe on the 28th o f the fame m onth.

Thus you fee, Sir, that the Captain obtain- Ied, upon the firft application, a favour, I which neither the complaints of our brave I feamen, nor the fervice of our country I could obtain in many months; nor could 1ever, I believe, have obtained, if the Ca- I ptain had not been encouraged to apply I for it. From a court-martial fo obtain* I ed, the officer who had been fo bold as to make himfelf the accuier, could notin- I deed expeft much juitice; and their very fxrft ftep convinced him and every oneelfe, that they were aflembled, not to try, but to acquit the Captain, if poffible; for whatever may be the praftice in our Cjiij- mon law court?, it was right in Lieut.je-kyll, to refufe being examined as a wi(* refs, after having made himfelf the accu- fer, by his letter to the Admiral, coiw plaining of his Captain’s cowardly behaviour. He was certainly, in common ’ reafon, to fupport his accufation by the ! teftimony of other witnefles, and not by his own teftimony on oath or otherwife. By his letter to the Admiral he had made himfelf a party; confequently, it waia proper point of honour in him to refufe ; being examined upon oath: for which reafon the court fhould have admitted him as the accufer, and (hould have furniihed him with the proper powers to bring all fuch witnefles to be examined, as he thought neceflary for fupporting his ac* cufation. But, inftead of this, they re* fufed to admit any one as the accufer or profecutor, but the perfon appointed by themfelves, or at leaft by the Admiral; and the confequence of this was, that no one witnefs was fummoned or examined, except fuch as voluntarily offered them* felves, or fuch as were fummoned by the Captain. Nay, the court exprefsly refu* fed to allow the Gentlemen who had gi* ven evidence againft the Captain, tofum- mon any witnefles for fupporting their evidence : and what was ftill worfe, they refufed to examine the officers of theMarlborough, for no other reafon, but becaufe, in their letter defiring to be examined, they fhcwed, that their depofiti* ons would not be in favour of the Captain of the Eflex, which the court were pleafed to call prejudicing the cafe.

F ro m fuch a partial manner of proceeding!

1 1 2 Proceedings of the P o l i t i c a 1 C l u b . March 1746.. A a a a ^ ^ ____ _ — ^ __

7 ing, Sir, the Gentlemen who had given e-| vidence againft rheic (Captain, could not i| bat expert to hear him acquitted, and if themfeives brought under the fcandal o f lj having given in a falfe and malicious accu > fation: for I am not at all furprifed, ihat i a Captain of a man of war, and the fon 1 ot a rich Admiral, fh -uld find fome peril fons on board his fhip, to contradict the

evidence given againft h im ; efpecially as I the latter were not impowered cr allow- I ed by the court, to compel any one to be [ examined in fupport o f the evidence they

had given. But, luckily for the accufers,; the fa& was fo generally known in the I fleet, that even this court-martial, partial ’ as they had fhewn themfeives, would not | rifle their own characters fo far as to ac- I quit him : therefore they contrived how I to avoid giving any fentence, either o f ! condemnation or acquittal ; and for this \ end pretended, that as the Captain was i not then in his Majefty’ s fervice or pay,I they had no right, nor ought to determine [ a matter, which they had been exprefsly i ordered by the board of Admiralty to in

quire into.Sir, this is, in my opinion, not only a

mod illegal determination, but it is introducing a precedent that may be of the mull

| dangerous confequence to the publick fervice both by fea and land. For i f it fhould once beadmitted,that a man’s being out of hisMajefty’s payand fervicefhouldexempt him from the jurifdi&ion o f a court martial, for any crime he had committed whilft he was in the fervice, it would be in the power of every criminal, either in the fea or land fervice, to evade being tried or punilhed, if he could but obtain a dif- charge from his commanding officer, or prevail with him to accept his refignation.

I Nay, if this were admitted, neither our board of Admiralty, nor even his Majefty * himfelf, by his fovereign authority, could order fuch a criminal to be tried by a court-martial, or take any other method topanifh him for the crime he had committed, unlefs it was fuch a one as fell under the cognifanceof theCommon law;which in particular can take no notice o f cowardice, nor inflift any punifhment upon the coward, however much his country may have fuffaed by his mifbehaviour.

Thus the greateft coward might, by the favour of his commanding officer, efcape all punifhment; and of what dangerous confequence this might be to the publick fervice, I fhall leave for Gentlemen to confider.

For this reafon, Sir, i f no partiality orinjuftice had appeared in any other part o f the proceedings of this court martial, we ought to cenfure them, in order to preventthis opinion of theirs from ever takingplace, or being made ufe of as a precer dent upon any future occafion ; efpecially on fuch an occafion as this, where there is great reafon to fufpeft, that the refignation was defigned on purpofe to prevent the criminal’s being tried and pu- nifhed by a court-martial. I fay, the criminal, Sir: for, in my opinion, it appears even from what is faid by his own witnef- fes, that he never bore down uoon the enemy, or engaged any one o f their fhips within what is called point blank fhot; and, confequently, could not be in a line either with the Admiral, or his fecond the Marlborough ; who appear both to have been within point-blank (hot, from the damage they received, as well as from the damage they did the enemy. One o f his witnefles indeed, meaning G ray , fays, that when the EfTex firft began to engage, {he was within point-blank fhot o f the e- nemy ; but the court took care not to make him explain himfelf: and when he was afterwards afked, I f the EfTex was to windward or leeward of the Marlborough ? he anfwered, T o windward, to be fu re ; which could not be, if fhe had been within whatought to be called point blank fhot o f the enemy. And all his witnefleg agree, that when the Marlborough’ s maftol went by the board, his fhip, the EfTex, was not only to windward, but doing nothing : fo that fhe had nothing to prevent her going down to the afiiftance of the Marlborough, but the pretence o f not breaking the line without an exprefs order from the Admiral: which to me feems to be nothing but a mere pretence ; becaufe in the time of aftion it is impoflible for an Admiral to attend to every accident that may happen ; and therefore, a fhip that has nothing to do, may certainly leave her ftation in the line, in order to

affift

March 1 7 4 6 . Proceedings of the P o l i t i c a l C l u b . 1 1 3* # • ■ 1 « ■ __. * f t m

i i 4 "Proceedings of the P o l i t i c a l C l u b . March 1746 Iaffift any fhip fhe fees in dillrefs: for I mult obierve, that the chief triumph we obtained, which was the taking, and afterwards aeilroying the Spanifh fliip called the Poder; I fay, this chief triumph was occafioned by one o f our fhips leaving, not only her ftation in the line, butthe divifion fhe belonged to. When I fay this, every Gentleman muft fuppofe 1 mean the Berwick, one of our Rear-Admiral's divilion ; the Captain of which bravely left, without any orders, not only his ftation, but his divifion, in order to attack the Puder, becaufe he faw that our fhips abreait of her fired at fuch a diftance as not to be able to do her much damage.

In fhort, Sir, from all the circumftan- ces o f this day’s engagement, and even from the evidence brought by the Captain whofe behaviour is now under our confederation, it is manifeft, that he was too much under the influence o f that fpirit which prevailed over molt o f the Captains in the Admiral’s divifion ; I mean that of keeping as much out of harm’s way as poffible: and if we give credit to thofe Gentlemen who appeared voluntarily a- gainft him, we mult believe him to be iuch an arrant poltroon, that his efcaping unpunifhed will be a lafting fcandal to this nation. I lhall grant, that their evidence has been exprefsly contradicted, in feveral material circumftances, by the wit- nefles he brought to fwear in his favour: but when we confider all circumftances, it is no difficult matter to determine which fide deferves the moft credit. When we confider the high ftation which this Captain’s father has been defervedly raifed to in our navy, and the great influence he muft, confequently, have upon all our naval preferments, it is not probable that a- ny man, much lefs a number of men,, could, out o f refentment, confpire to bring a falfe accufation againft him ; becaufe they could not but forefee, that to purfue their refentment in fuch a manner, would make it rebound with infinitely greater force againft themfelves. By fuch a method of proceeding, they could expedt nothing but ruin upon his being acquitted. Had they fucceeded in obtaining a fen-tence againft him! they could expert no

reward. On the other hand, when wei confider the Captain’s circumflances; the protection he apparently met with from' the Admiral, the long time he had to pra-1 ftife upon the men that had been under his command, and the rewards that might be expeCted by thofe that offered orenga* i ged to fwear in his favour; we cannot wonder, that, in this degenerate age, he found j fome men on board his fhip, ready to con- tradiCt, upon oath, any fad that had been fworn againft him, or any thing that had been objected to his conduCt. And when vve confider, that there was, in reality, no profecutor allowed to appear againft him, nor any one to crofs examine his witnef- fes, we may wonder, that the proof of his innocence was not more full, morediftinft, and more corfiftent, than it appears to be.

Thefe things being confidered, itiseafy,I fay, Sir, to determine which fide of the evidence deferves the moft credit; but as we are not now to declare, that the Captain was either innocent or guilty of what was laid to bis charge, we have nothing to do with the credibility of the evidence of either fide o f the queftion : all we have at prefent to do, is, to confider the proceedings of the court-martial that inquired into his conduCt. And thefe proceedings are fo extraordinary, that I fhall notfcru- ple in the leaft giving them all the bad names my Hon. friend has been pleafed to mention. Upon the very face of them they appear to be fuch as no man, I believe, either within doors or without, will pretend to juftify ; and I hope the notice that has been taken of them in this houfe,will make all future courts-martial refolveto proceed with more candour towards the accufer, with more feverity towards the perfon accufed. Whatever may have been the former practice,! hope ail future courts- martial will make it a rule, to allow any perfon to fet himfelf up as the accufer or profecutor, or at leaft as a joint profecutor with the crown; and, fo far from refufing, upon frivolous pretences, any witneffes that lhall offer to appear, I hope they will make it a rule, to furnifh both prifoner and profecutor with the neceffary powers for compelling all perfons to appear, whothey think can give any account of the facti in qqeftion*

It* ^

March1746. Proceedings of the P o l i t i c a l C l u b .*, : It is,'1 know, Sir, the prattice at Com- y mon law, to make ihe profecutor or ac- J cufer appear as a witnefs, and give his e-

̂ viflence upon oath againft the prifoner j I but it is the neceffity o f the thing alone ̂ that can excofe the practice: for tho* the

1 law fuppofes, that the profecutor is only j an evidence for the King, and no other- ’ wife concerned in the trial, he is in reali- ' ty a party, and may fuffer by the event, ,i if the court Ihould think the profecution* malicious; therefore, even at Common* law, he mould never be compelled, or in- '] deed admitted to appear as a witnefs, when I itis notablolutely neceflary; and as courts- j martial are not bound to follow any o f the 1 prattices of our Common law courts far- I ther than they think them reafonabie, I I muft look upon it as a piece of very great I injoftice in this courfmartial, to infilt up- ' on the accufer or profecutor’s being fworn, \ or otherwife to exclude him from being j prefent in the court, in order to iupport f his accufation ; for in this they followed f the praCtice neither o f law nor o f reafon.

If they had followed the practice o f law, they might have compelled him to be

[ fworn ; if that of reafon, they muft have admitted him to be prefect in court, to fupport his accufation by fuch queftions or crois queftions, as he thought neceflary for

' making the witnefTes tell all the truth, and nothing but the truth.

This was therefore a manifeft piece o f injuftice with refpeCfc to the profecutor,

► and of partiality with refpeCt to the prifoner or who ought at leaft to have been

; a prifoner: for, during the whole trial, he feems to have been treated rather as a member of the court, than as a prifoner at their bar. But what, I think, wasmuch more illegal, and indeed a fhocking

1 piece of injuftice, was their refufing to admit the other accufers o f this Captain to go into the proof of their own depofitions, or to bring any witnefTes for confirming the evidence they had given, or falfifying that which had been given in favour o f the Captain. Surely, i f the profecutor, fet up by the court, had not been a fham profecutor, he would have infilled upon it as his right, to bring what witnefies he pleafed to be examined, and would havethought himfelf obliged to thofe Gentle*

1 1 5

men, i f they could have informed him o f any other witnefTes that were material to be examined; for where there is a contradiction of evidence, it is the bufinefs o f the profecutor to fupport his evidence, and it is the duty of the court to examine every man whole evidence can any w a ycontribute towards adifcoveryof the truth. In this therefore the court aCted illegally, as well as partially and unjultly ; and as fuch proceedings in courts-martial maybe of the moll dangerous confequence to the pubHck fervice, J think it abfolutely neceifany for us to endeavour, by a publiclc cenfure, to prevent the like for the future: for which reafon, 1 (hall conclude withfeconding my Hon. friend’s motion.

The fpeecb o/'Servilius Piifcus, in the character o f Henry Pelham, Efq\ who fpoke next.

M r P re f dent,

I Do not iland up to vindicate the Captain vvhofe ConduCt is now under our conlideration, nor do I ftand up tojuftify the proceedings of the court-martial which was appointed to inquire into the afper- fions that had been thrown on his character in regard to his conduCt and behaviour in the late engagement off Toulon ; tho’ both have been, I think, in feme meafure mifunderftood, and confequently mifreprefented, by the Hon. Gentlemen who made and feconded the motion now before us. T h e chief end o f my ftanding up, is, to juftify his Majefty’ s conduCt in this affair, and to prevent what, in my o« pinion, will be fuch an incroachment up* on the prerogatives o f the crown as may be of the moll dangerous confequence to the publick fervice. This I take to be my duty as one of his Majefty’ s fervants ;this I take to be m y duty as a member o f this houfe; and therefore I hope you will excufe the trouble I think mylelf obliged to give you upon this occafion.

I believe, Sir, it will not be denied, that his Majefty has by his prerogative the foie power over both our fleets and armies; and confequently his Majefty, or fuch as he fhall appoint, muft be the foie judge of the conduCt o f every officer. W h en any officer, either o f the navy or army,is accufed of mifconduCt, or even lufpeft-

1 1 6 Proceedings of the P o l i t i c a l C l u b . March 1746 |!ed o f any mifcondud, the method hitherto has been, for his Majefty to appoint a court martial, at any time he thinks fir, to inquire into fuch officer’s condud upon fuch a particular occalion; and when they have made a full inquiry, they either pafs inch a fentence as they think juft, or they report the whole matter to his Majefty, and leave to him the determination ofwhat punifhment he may think the officer deferves. Even when the court-martial pafTes fentence, that fentence muft be confirmed by his Majefty before it can be put in execution ; and he may alter it, or fufpend the execution, if he pleafes; or he may order a new trial, if he fees any juft caufe. This, Sir, has been hitherto the pradice; by this pradice all the offi cers of our army and navy have been kept under a due obedience to the CTOwn ; andas our courts-martial are anfwerable tonone but their fovereign for their proceedings, they have generally fulfilled the truft repofed in them with fidelity to the crown, and a ftiid regard to the publick fervice; being fenfible, that if they fhould condemn an innocent man, the crown would prevent the execution ; that if they fhould acquit a guilty perfon, they could »ot the.eby free him from punifhment; and that in both cafes they would expofethemfelves to the refentment of their fovereign.

W hat effed this pradice has had withregard to the publick fervice, we very well know, and muft rejoice in, becaufe i t has generally made us victorious over our enemies abroad, and h*.s fecured thepublick tranquillity at home, by which the nation has been railed to that high degree o f riches, power, and influence it ss now arrived at: but i f this houfe fhould begin to interfere with the crown, in the exercife of any power over our fleets and arm ies; if we fnould begin to inquire into the conduct of officers, and to cenfure the proceedings of courts-martial, no one knows whatefFeds it might produce. One, I think, is certain, that it would transfer the dependence, and confequently the o- bedience of the officers, both of our fleets and armies, from the crown to this afTem bly : for fhould we once begin to inquireand cenfure, we would very foon begin to

punifh ; and fhould we once afTume a power to punifh, we would very foon af- I: ter afTume a power to reward. Thus the I; power of rewarding and punifhing would f foon become to be lodged wholly jn this I afiembly ; by this the eyes of every offi- 1 cer, both in our fleets and armies, would I be fixed here alone ; and then we might, I whenever we pleafed, aflume the foie I power to command, as well as the foie 1 power to reward and punifh: which would ! entirely alter the nature of our conllitu- i tion in efFcd, and very probably foon af- : ter in form as well as efTed j for a houfe of Commons that had uiurped the power over our fleets and armies, would in all probability follow the example of their predeceflors in 1640, andabolifh both the other branches of our legiflature. We fhould then again have a government e- ftablifhed under the name of 7be common' wealth of England, which I believe would be no longer-lived than that which was eftablifhed at that extraordinary canjun* dure I have mentioned.

Notwithllanding thefe fatal confequen- ces, which I think we have great reafon to apprehend ; yet, Sir, if the adminiftra- tion of publick juftice could be better fecured, or more firmly eftabiifhed, by the frequency of our inquiries or cenfures, I fhould not be fo much againft them. But experience may teach us, that numerous aflemblies are not the moft proper for a due adminiftration o f juftice. Party and faction too often prevail over juftice in fuch afTemblies; and their fentence is generally either too mild or too fevere. If it can be fuppofed, that in his Majefty’s courts of juftice a guilty officer may be fcreened, by having a near relation who has great wejght in his Majetty’s councils,I am fure it may with more reafon be fuppofed, that in any fort of profecution here, a guilty officer may be fcreened, by havinga near relation who has great weightin this afiembly. For this reafon, Sir, if it be now become more ufual than it was in former times, for Gentlemen of great families to betake themfelves to the army or navy, we fhould be more cautious than formerly of interfering with the crown in the adminiftration of juftice, or any thingelfe relating to the government of our ar

my

my or navy : for i f upon an inquiry into ! an officer’s conduit, it fhould be voted by

this houfe, that he had punctually performed his duty, I believe no court-mar- tial would afterwards venture to condemn him; and therefore thofe officers who had great friends or relations, might negleCl their duty, in hopes o f being fcreened by a vote o f this afTembly, upon the iffue o f an inquiry fet on foot by their friends for that very purpofe. On the other hand, it might often happen, that a brave anddiligent, but unfortunate officer, might be .profecuted and condemned by a parliamentary inquiry, for no other reafon butbecaufe he happened to be o f a party or faCtion different from that which had the prevailing influence in this aflerably.

In my opinion, therefore, Sir, nothing can contribute more to the deftroying o f all fort o f military difcipline in the army or navy, than a too frequent ufe of parliamentary inquiries into the conduCl o f officers: and a frequent or unneceflary inquiry into the proceedings o f courts-martial will certainly have the fame efFeCl; for if their proceedings are to be examined into upon every trivial occafion by thisaflembly, no court-martial will ever pal's any fentence, at Iealt they will take care never to condemn an officer whofe friends are known to have great influence in this houfe j for upon every fuch cccaiion they would be under the dread o f having their proceedings inquired into and cenfured: and what might be the confequence of a parliamentary cenfure neither they nor any one elfe could pretend to foretelj efpecially if in purfuance of their fentence an officer fhould be fhot for cowardice or defertion, and that fentence Ihould afterwards be voted partial, arbitrary and illegal, by the intereft o f his friendsand relations in this aflembly. W e could not, ’ tis true, with all our power, re- cal the dead man to l i fe ; but we might, and probably would, for that very reafon, fall upon fome method to punifh thofewhofe fentence had been the caufe o f hisdeath.

This, Sir, would neceflàrily beget a dispute between us and our fovereign ; for the King would, and indeed ought to thinkhimfelf obliged in honour to proteft ihofe

V ol. V III.* ^

who had acted by his commimon and with his approbation: and the confequence of thisdifpute, whichever fide fhould prevail, would be fatal to our èonftitution. Aà this houfe has the foie power of granting money, without which no fleet or army could be fupported by any legal means, theK in g could not prevail in fuch a difputevunlefs both fleet and army fhould agree to enable him to lay parliaments afide, and eftablifh an arbitrary government; and i f this houfe ihould prevail, it would, as I have faid, transfer the dependence of our fleets and armies from the crown to this aflem bly; the confequence of which I have already explained. And this confequence we have the more reafon to apprehend, becaufe it has once already put an end to our conflitution. By an extraordinary, and I may almoft fay, a miraculous intervention o f providence, our con- llitution was at that time reftored without any blood-fhed; but i f we fhould tread again the fame path to deftruCtion, I am fure we fhould not deferve, and I doubt much i f we fhould meet with any intervention o f providence in our favour. Therefore we fhould be extremely cautious of making the leaft incroachment upon that part o f our conftitution which has placed in the crown the foie power overour fleets and armies.

When I fay this, Sir, I hope it will notbe thought, rhat I am arguing againft our ever making an inquiry into the conduCt o f any officer, or into the proceedings of any coijrt-matial. M y meaning is only to fhew, that no fuch inquiry ought ever to be fet on foot, except upon fome very extraordinary and important occafion. When a great officer, fuch as a General or an Admiral who happens to be a member o f this houfe, defires that his conduCtmay be inquired into, in order to vindicate his character from the falfe and malicious afperfions that have been thrown upon it, we may comply with his requeft; or when there appears to be a failure or a want o f juftice on the part o f the crown, w e may inquire into the conduCt o f any officer, or into the proceedings of any court-martial. But in the cafe now before us, neither o f thefe can be pretended.T h e officer whofe conduct this motion re»

' la tea

M a r c h 1 7 4 6 . Proceedings of the P o l 1 t 1 c a l C l u b . 1 1 7t * f • • • 1 1 1 /N 1 I 1 9 * % « ■

118 Proceedings of the P o l i t i c a l C lu b . March1746.lates to, is neither a member o f this houfe, nor is he in fuch a high ftation as to de- ferve the attention of this alTembly. And as to the proceedings of the court-martial appointed to inquire into his conduCt, fuppofe they deferve all the hard names that are to be given them by this motion, yet we cannot fay there is as yet any failure of juftice on the part c f the crown. I f the proceedings of that court martial were partial, arbitrary, and illegal, we ought to give the crown time to inquire intothem, and to get them rectified, before we think o f taking the cognifance of them to ourfelves. Can it be faid that the crown has as yet had a fufficient time for this purpofe, when we confider that the court-martial did n t end till the 5th of February laft, and that it was held ai fuch a diftance that we cannot fuppofe the crown had any account of its proceedings before the end o f laft month ? This m o tion therefore, I think, we cannot at this time, nor indeed in this feffion, comp y with. When the crown has negleCted to make ufe of its prerogative, and the publick is like to fuffer by that negleCt; or when the crown has made a wrong ufe of its prerogative; the parliament has then, I (hall grant, a right to interpofe; nay I think it is our duty to interpofe: but till then, we ought never to aflame to ourfelves the cognifance of any cafe whichby our conftitution belongs properly and folely co the crown : and I believe no Gentleman will fay, that the crown has not by its prerogative as much a right to judge of and reCtify the proceedings of a court martial, as it has to appoint a court- martial.

For this reafon, Sir, however partial,however arbitrary and illegal the proceedings of this court-martial may have been, I hope Gentlemen will fufpend their re* fenrment till next feffion j when an inquiry into them may be fet on foot without doing any great violence to our conftitution, in ca(e the crown fhould nòt before that time have made a proper ufe

VI March 1746. Proceedings o f the Po l i t i c a l C l u b . 119

trial, treated by the court-martial with that refpett that is due to his character:

I and even when upon the trial he is found i guilty of fome mifbehavicur, he remains j at liberty, unlefs confinement or a corporal I pumlhinent be a part of his fentence. j- Now, Sir, let us confider, that the court-

martial whofe proceedings are now under oar confideration, was a court-martial of the latter fort. It was appointed by anexprefs order from the Lords o f the A d miralty; and that order was iflued upon the application, and at the eamell requeft of the officer who was to be tried. This court-martial therefore could neither confine him, nor be any way wanting in thatrelped which was due-to his ftation, w ith out tranfgrefTmg thofe rules which have been eflablifhed by a long and uninterrupted cullom in the navy ; and, confequent* ly, upon this head no juft objt&ion can be made to any part of their proceedings.Then, as to the fecond objection, whatever incongruity there may be, according to the reafon of things, in examining an accafer upon oath, or in not admitting a- nyone as a profecutor upon the trial, e x cept the perfon employed by the crown for that purpofe, it is a cuftom that has prevailed for time immemorial in criminal trials, both at Common law and beforecourts-martial; and cannot therefore, in my opinion, be altered by any court whatever, without the authority o f an aft of parliament. I f this court-martial therefore refufed to admit the Lieutenant who had accufed his Captain as the profecutor, they did no more than what theywere authorifed to do by cuftom ; nay, i fthey had done otherwife, their proceedings would, in this refpett, have been illegal: and if they did not compel him to appear as a witnefs, and give his evidence upon oath, which they thought, it feems, they could not do, it was but an error in point of law, and cannot deferve any o fthe hard names contained in this motion ;for had they thought otherwife, they might have concluded, in my opinion, with great reafon, that among fuch a number o f officers and private men as mull always be on board a large man of war, there could not be a fcarcity of witneflej for fettingthe Captain’s behaviour in its true l i g h t ;

■ *

and that therefore they had no occafion to force any particular man to appear as a witnefs upon the trial.

Thus, Sir, againft this obje&ion like- wife the proceedings o f this court m rtialmuft ftand juftified ; and with refpcti tothe third objection, I mult think, that the Lieutenants of the Marlborough, by their letter to A dm Rowley, did fhew themfeives a little too much prejudiced againfl the Captain of the Eflex, to be admitted as unexceptionable witnefles: for in that very letter they prefume to pafs fentence againft the Captain o f the Eflex, by faying, that the juft and honourable dcligns of his Lieutenants were in danger of being baffled ; and they further declare, that theythought themfeives the greateft fufferers, by his not doing his duty ; confequently the court could not but fuppofe that they would be partial in their evidence: and therefore I muft think, it would have been a little partial in the court to have admitted them as witnefles. Then as to the demand made by the Lieutenants of the EfTex, if there were any other witnefles that were ready to confirm what they had fworn, they fhould have given in a lift o f them to the prolecutor for the crown, who was the only proper perfon they could apply to for that pnrpofe ; therefore their application to the Admiral was contrary to form, and for that reafon, I fuppofe, the court thought it ought to be re- jefted, becaufe they were neither profe-cutors, nor could be admitted as fuch ; which would have been the cafe, if theyhad been allowed to bring whatever wit*.nefles they pleafed to be examined upon the trial.

In both thefe refufals, Sir, the courthad therefore fome reafon for what they did ; and if that reafon be not thought fufficient, it may be an argument for faying they had bad heads; but it can be no argument for faying they had bad hearts; and much lets for our declaring, that they afted partially, arbitrarily and illegally.And now, Sir, with regard to the laft objection made to the proceedings of thiscourt martial, which is that of their re- folving not to come to any refolution up*, on thefubjeft matter o f their inquiry, butto fend home their whole proceedings to

thq

120 The right of the houfe of Stewart March 1746.the Lords o f the Admiralty ; this, I amfure, can neither be called partial, arbitrary, nor illegal; for furely no man can be faid to a61 partially, arbitrarily, or illegally, when he does not aft at all. N ay it cannot be fo much as faid, that in this the members o f the court-martial were any way deficient in their duty ; becaufe there is nothing more cuftomary, than for courts-martial not to pafs any fentence, but to refer the whole o f their proceedings to the board of Admiralty; efpecial- ly in matters which they find very difficult to determine, or when they think they have not fufiicient power to determine. Which laft feems to have been the cafe with this court-martial: for the orderfrom the Lords of the Admiralty direCtsthe Admiral to affemble a court-martial to inquire into the Captain’s conduct and behaviour in the engagement off Toulon; but goes no farther. It neither direCts the court-martial nor the Admiral to pafs fentence; and much lefs to punifh the Captain in cafe of his being found guilty of any mifbehaviour: and therefore, even fuppofing the Captain to have been ftill in the fervice and pay of the government, the court-martial had fome reafon to doubt o f their power to pafs fentence, cither againft him, or in his favour.

Thefe, Sir, are fome of the reafons that may be fuggefted in anfwer to what has been objected againft the proceedings of this court martial. Whether thefe reafons may be thought fufficient for juftify- ing every part of their proceedings, is what I do not k n o w ; but I hope they will be thought fufficient for (hewing, that we ought not to be rafh or precipitate in paffing that fevere cenfure upon them which is propofed by this motion. I f it fhould become proper and neceffary for us to ex amine the proceedings o f this court-martial, I think we ought to take a little more time to inquire into the affair, and we ought to give the members o f that court martial an opportunity to be heard, before we pafs a cenfure which muft fo nearly affeCt their characters. But I have already fhewn, that as yet it is neither proper nor neceffary for us to enter into any inquiry relating to this affair, becaufethe crown cannot as yet be faid either not $

to have made the proper ufe, or to have made a wrong ufe o f that prerogative which gives it the foie power of rectifying ]the proceedings of courts-martial. There- ifore, fuppofing I were fully convinced, ; that the proceedings of this court-martial deferved the cenfure now propofed, I fhould be for poftponing it till next feffion ; for I fhall always be againft our interfering with any of the prerogatives of the crown, till it becomes manifeftly ne- cefTary for us to do fo.

[This debate to be continued ]

Ike right o f the houfe o f Stewart to the crown of Scotland conftdereà. Puhlijhed before the end o f January laji.

[ N . B. All the notes are the author’s, except the laft in p. 124. which we have added.J

Imperivm femper ad optimum quemque a minus bono transfèrtur. Sail.

Sit àenique infcriptum in fronte uniufcujuf* que quid de republica Jentiat. Cic.

T H E difpute betwixt the Whigs andthe Jacobites turning upon the twopoints of right and expediency, moft of our late pamphlets have been employed in con- fidering the latter. This branch of the argument is indeed that which, in our rea- foning with the Whigs, ought chiefly to be infilled on ; but, in our reafoniog with

: Jacobites, can only be o f force when their notions of right are in the firft place deft royed. A perfon perfuaded of the di-

1 vine indefeafible right of Kings to govern

(March 1746. to the crown of Scotland conjtdered. 121I author dare exprefs his hope, to correct

the prejudices of' a few.*If we are true Scot/men, and the author

' writes to none elfe, we cannot fail of being fired with indignation, when told, that

- we neither are, nor ever were a free and , independent people; that we have been,[ from ages moft remote, the abfolute proper- ' ty of a certain family, who claim us as

their inheritance ; that we are now the property, not of a King, but the fhadow of a King, the banifhed race o f a tyrant. Yet this, certain late manifefto’s have founded in our ears, wherein we, and our country, are claimed as the ejiale o f one, who tells us he poflefles by virtue o f a divine, hereditary, indefeafible grant. W hatever the Jacobites may think of this, fure there is no man of common fenfe, but muft look upon it as the grofleft affront capable of being offered himfelf, or his country. They indeed hug their chains, and are proud o f being f la w s ; nay are fond of ranking with their flocks and herds, and of being bought and barteredlike them. But, thank, heaven, we are not all of the fame brutal difpofition: there are ftill fome amongft us who imagine themfeivesfreet the property of no King, no pretender, whatever.

Thefe Gentlemen and freemen imagine, that there is no perfon, no family, who ever had, or now has, a divine, hereditary, indefeafible right to govern them. They allow, that the race o f Stewart did for many years pofTefs the throne of Scotland: but they infift, that it was by no means by virtue o f fuch a r ig h t; feeing the firft of that race that ever reigned, reigned by the confent of a free people, and the authority o f the parliament. And they apprehend, that no man can convey more right to another, than he himfelf is veiled w ith; according to the brocard,Nemo plus juris in alterum transferre potejit quam ipfe in fe habet.

To demonftrate this, they beg leave to look back as far as the death of Alexan-derlih who died anno I 285.

The race of that monarch becomingI

extinft by the death o f his grand daughter Margaret^ the right of fucceflion to the crown of Scotland, came to be calle

The right o f the houfe of Stewart March 1746.1 2 2who had competed with him, got into thethrone o f Scotland; even while Baliol was alive, and had a Ton, Edward, capable of fucceeding him. And the Hates, in a convention held at Air in the year 1315, were not content with barely acknowledging him as King ; bur, by a folemn deed, fettled the crown on him, and aparticular j'ucceiTi m of heirs therein narrated.— Vide Anderson's Appendix, N°. 24.

Daring his fon David's minority (1329)young B a lh l attempted to recover Scot- tand, t ie fucceeded, was crowned, and reverfed the ads made in Bruce's reign, as made during an ufurpation. But he too was foon expelled, and David Bruce fettled on the throne.

David died without iflue ; and hisfitter hailing married Walter Great Stew-oard of Scotland, her fon Robe