XVIII. BOOK The only part of admiral Keppel's conduct really culpable appears to have proceeded from 1778. that excess of deference and respect for sir Hugh Palliser, which prevented his adopting those daring and decisive measures the occasion called for in order to improve in the most effectual manner an opportunity of which he had little reason to expect the return. The courage of sir Hugh Palliser had been on many occasions too conspicuous to be questioned; but that principle of envy, so powerful in some minds, could not endure that a man whom he regarded in the light of a rival should acquire such an addition of fame and superiority as must have resulted from a complete and decided victory. The SESSION commenced on the 26th of November, 1778. The speech from the throne was loud in complaint of "the unexampled and unprovoked hostility of the court of France; and regret was expressed that the efforts which had been made for disappointing the malignant designs of the enemy had not been attended with all the success which the justice of the cause, and the vigorous exertions which had been made, seemed to promise." The addresses of both houses, in the usual style of duty and loyalty, were carried by great majorities. But in a short time the attention of parliament was attracted XVIII. 1778. by a motion made by the marquis of Rocking- BOOK ham, "That an humble address be presented tow his majesty, to express the displeasure of the house at the manifesto issued under the seal of the American commissioners on the 3d day of October last; and to acquaint his majesty with the sense of this house, that the said commissioners had no authority whatsoever under the act of parliament, in virtue of which they were appointed to make such declaration; and humbly beseeching that the said manifesto be pubfickly disavowed by his majesty." The noble mover, in the course of an able and excellent speech, addressed himself to the BISHOPS in a manner peculiarly striking. He observed that "the nature and principle of the war were entirely changed. The right reverend bench, relying on the assurances of ministers, might originally have believed its motives honorable, and its object easily attainable; but the same ministers now declared to all the world, that a totally new system of policy was adopted, America was relinquished, and a new species of war denounced, tending merely and avowedly to revenge, slaughter, and universal destruction. The simple votes of their lordships on this occasion would at once fully express their detestation of the inhuman system in question, and, in con BOOK junction with those of the temporal lords who XVIII. 1778. entertained the same sentiments, would fully obviate its effects." After a vehement debate, in which the ministers endeavoured, by refinements of explanation, to palliate what no one dared explicitly to defend, the motion was negatived by a majority of 71 to 37 peers, 31 of whom joined in a protest of uncommon energy and ability. The public law of nations," said their lordships, "in affirmance of the dictates of nature and the precepts of religion, forbids us to resort to the extremes of war upon our own opinion of their expediency, or in any case to carry on war for the purpose of desolation. We are shocked to see the first law of nature, selfpreservation,' perverted and abused into a principle destructive of all other laws. Those objects of war which cannot be compassed by fair and honorable hostility ought not to be compassed at all. An end that has no means but such as are unlawful is an unlawful end." It is painful to remark, that the name of one bishop only, the venerable Shipley of St. Asaph, is to be found in the long and illustrious train of signatures affixed to this memorable protest; which, if it wanted any other recommendation to notice than its own intrinsic merit, might with pride recount the names of a Rockingham, a XVIII. Camden, an Effingham, a Harcourt, and many BOOK others, inferior neither in wisdom nor in virtue to any which this age or country could boast. Some time after the Christmas recess, Mr. Fox moved a vote of censure upon lord Sandwich, for sending admiral Keppel, with twenty ships of the line only, to a station off the coast of France, thereby hazarding the safety of the kingdom, the Brest fleet consisting at that time of thirty-two ships of the line, besides a great superiority of frigates. Mr. Fox said, if the present motion was carried, he should follow it. with another, for the removal of the first lord of the admiralty. This nobleman had deservedly incurred the public resentment and odium by the countenance he had given to the late prosecution of admiral Keppel. Of this he now felt the effect; the motion of censure being negatived, in a very full house, by a majority of 34 voices only. Encouraged by the unaccustomed strength of the minority on this occasion, Mr. Fox in a few days moved, “That the state of the navy, at the breaking out of the present war, was inadequate to the exigencies of the service." This motion he enforced in a speech of singular ability. In the course of the debate, lord Howe declared his resolution to decline all future service so long as the present ministers continued in office. A decisive experience had 1778. XVIIL BOOK taught him, that besides risking his honor and professional character in such an attempt, he 1778. could not, under such councils, render any essen tial service to his country. The whole force of the ministry being exerted to parry this attack, the previous question was moved and carried by a majority of 246 to 174 voices. The indulgence shewn in the last session to the roman catholics made the refusal of the claim of the protestant dissenters appear so extremely invidious on the part of the court, that it was judged improper longer to discourage the application for their relief; and on the motion of sir Henry Houghton, seconded by Mr. Frederic Montague, a bill for that purpose was brought in, and passed through both houses with very trivial opposition. The debate in the house of lords was, however, rendered memorable, by a very remark able speech of Dr. Shipley, bishop of St. Asaph, the friend and disciple of HoADLEY, and on whom the mantle of that illustrious prelate seemed in an especial manner to have descended. His lordship expressed "his most cordial acquiescence in the repeal of those penal laws which had long been the disgrace of the national church he objected only to the condition annexed to the repeal--the IMPOSITION of a confession of faith, however short and general and true-such as he hoped he should have the |