to make them the grounds of fome very elegant and beautiful papegyrics on Mr Fox and Lord North, and their friends; and of a variety of moft pointed farcafins on the Board of Controul, and its leader, the Treafwer of the Navy.

The Lord Chancellor left the woolfack, and argued with his wonted weight of reafoning in fupport of the prefeat bill, obferving that the noble and learned Lord, who had spoken with fo much force of argument against it, had not ventured to deny that the declaratory bill did not give the true expofition of the act of 1784. On that ground, in his mind, the whole argument turned, and to that he should tolely confine himself, laying cut of the cate all comparison of the hill of 1783 and the bill of 1784, for the whole of which, and all that could be faid about it, he declared he did not care one farthing, and had no mind to make an election fpeech with a view to obtain the vote of either this or that burgefs, or in favour of this or that character: they were confiderations extraneous to the prefent queflion.

The Marquis of Lan/docune contended, that the bill was a bill affecting private rights, and it had nevertheless been conducted through the Houfe with the moft unprecedented and moft fhameful hurry and precipitation, which the noble and learned Lord muft give him leave to fay, it was in a peculiar degree his particular duty to have guarded againff, and to have feen, that if the parties were intercepted in their way to the Courts below, and deprived of the advantage of a judicial decifion, that they met with fubftantial juftice in that Houfe. He denied that any thing like juftice had been done the Eaft India Company. They had not been allowed to be heard in defence of their rights, nor had noble Lords themfelves been allowed time for deliberation. What had been the treatment the bill had received? It had been decided in three days. His Lordship praifed Lord Loughborough's fpeech of that day, not only as one of the fineft that ever was written, but as the fineft perhaps ever heard by man. He declared his perfect concurrence in the noble and learned Lord's arguments throughout, and faid, that the claufes called checks in the bill, were not checks, but covers, which as a pursuance of abuse of power, and fhelter for it, he ever fhould reprobate. After a variety of fevere animadverfions, delivered in very empaffioned language, he concluded with condemning the Lill as

difgraceful to Parliament, and in the highest degree unjust to the Eaft India Company.

The Duke of Richmond denied that the claufes were meant as covers, and indig nantly repelled the imputation of their having been moved with that intention. The Duke faid, he wifhed parties would forbear running at each other, and would lok directly and feriously to the greater confideration, viz. to what ought ultimately to be done with India. We had the territories there in poffeffion, and we muft either protect and defend, or abandon them altogether. Something deci five muft foon be determined.

The Marquis of Lanjdorae rose to explain refpecting the word covers. lie faid, he had charged no man with intentionally moving the claufes as covers. No perfon could know a man's intentions, they were known to God Almighty only.

Át half after ONE in the morning, the queílion was put, and the House divided,

Contents 71-Non-Contents 28.
Majority for paffing the bill 43.
DISSENTIENT.

ift, Because we object altogether to the very ftile and form of the prefent bill, in as much as it purports to be a declara. tory bill of a kind as dangerous in its application as it is certainly unufual, if not new, in its principle. If the act of the 24th of his Majefty be clearly expreffed, any declaration of its fenfe is evidently unneceffary; if it be worded, whether from accident or defign, in dark and equivocal terms, we conceive, that in order to do away every ambiguity, the mode moft open and candid in itfelt, as well as most regular and conformable to the ufage of Parliament, would have been by a bill to explain and amend, and not to declare And we cannot but behold this extraordinary bill with yet greater aların, when it has been avowed that it is intended to operate as an act of indemnity for paft meafures not explicitly ftat ed. Surely it is a propofition abfurd and monftrous on the very face of it, to call upon this Houfe to declare what was and is law fubject to provifions which fhall be. A declaration fo qualified is a new fpecies of a bill of indemnity, which, unlike all others, does not content itself with holding forth terms of protection against the penal confequences of an illegal act cominitted, but reti ofpectively alters and reveries the nature and effence of the action itfelf from its very origin, if certain pro

spective

pective conditions be fubfequently obferved.

2dly, Because the preamble of the prefent bill, which must be prefumed to fet forth the legal grounds of the propofed declaration, does not appear to us in reality to contain any fuch grounds. It offers nothing more than partial and pieced extracts from various fections of the 24th of his prefent Majefty, two of which evidently convey only general powers to be exercifed in fuch manner as in the faid act is directed," that is, fubject to limitations and modifications not recited in the preamble; and the third of thefe extracts, which is taken from the conclufion of the 11th fection of the act above-mentioned, is in truth part of a clause imperative on the Directors, not enabling to the Commiffioners: binding the former to obey the orders of the latter, (that is, all fuch orders as they may lawfully iffue under other parts of the act) but not conferring on the latter any portion of diftinct power. Their powers, whatever they may be, muft be fought in the enabling claufes of the act, by which alone this imperative claufe can be conftrued, but of which not a trace is to be difcovered in the preamble.

3dly, Because the limitations and reftraints on the power of the Commiffioners, which are now impofed for the first time in this bill, carry with them an intimation highly derogatory to the honour and wifdom of this Houfe: in as much as they imply, that in the very moment when this Houfe felt the moft tender apprehenfions for the fafety of chartered rights, and when they were moft anxiously alarmed for the confequences of transferring the power and patronage of the Company even for a time, they confcionfly and deliberately paffed an act, by which thofe rights were to be fuperfeded, and that power and patronage in effect vefted in the Board of Controul for ever, without fufficient checks and guards to protect the one, or to prevent the corrupt ufe of the other. The authors of thefe limiting and reftraining claufes have left to the majority of this Houte, no other refuge from the imputation of this inconfiftency, but in an ignorance of that meaning,which we are now called upon to declare.

4thly, Becaufe if any fuch limitations and restraints be indeed neceffary, the provifions of this bill, we are perfuaded, muft prove nugatory and inefficient.

5thly, Becaute, coupling the act of the 24th of his Majefly with all its accumulated explanations and amendments, and

understanding the powers there conferred on the Commiffioners to the extent implied in the preamble and linniting claufes of the present bill, the fyftem eftablished by that act in truth realizes all the dangers which were ever attributed to another meafure then recently rejec ted by this Houfe, and is certainly fruitful of formidable mifchiefs proper to itfelf, friendly to corrupt intrigue and cabal, hoftile to all good government, and elpecially abhorrent from the principles of our popular conftitution.

The patronage of the Company (and this seems to be the most serious terror to the people of England) the Commiffioners enjoy in the wort mode, without that refponfibility, which is the natural fecurity against malversation and abufe. They cannot immediately ap point, but they have that weight of recommendation and influence, which must ever infeparably attend on fubftantial power, and which in the prefent cafe has not any where been attempted to be denied,

Should this fail them in the firft in ftance, they can intimidate and encourage; they can fupprefs the approbation and the cenfure of the Directors on their own fervants; they can fubftitute blame for praife, and praise for blame, or they may inftantly recall whomfoever the Directors may appoint against their will; and this they may repeat, till they ulti mately compel the Directors, harraffed and over-awed, to nominate the man whom the Commiffioners may wish to favour. Nor is this difpofal of patronage without refponfibility, the only evil that charac terizes the fyftem; all the high powers and prerogatives with which the Com miffioners are vefted, they may exercife invifibly, and thus for a period at least invade, perhaps in a great measure finally baffle, all political refponfibility; for they have a power of adminiftering to their clerks and other officers an oath of fecrecy framed for the occafion by themfelves; and they poffefs in the India Houfe the fufpicious inftrument of a fecret committee, confifting only of the Chairman, the Deputy-chairman, and one other Director, all bound to them by an oath. Through these they have fent an arrangement for paying the debts of the Nabob of Arcot, beneficial to individuals, injurious to the Company, and fundamentally contradicting the plain principle of an exprefs clause in that very act by which their own Board was inftituted; and through these they have concurred to tranfmit a dispatch, altered too

by

by themselves, on a fubject of mere trade, over which they profefs to difclaim all right of management. After fuch examples, we must confefs that our imaginations cannot figure to us any defcription of bufinefs, which may not be fheltered behind the thick veil of the fecret committee; and from our paft experience relative to the firft of thefe tranfactions, we are fo jufly fenfible of the great advantages with which the fervants of the Crown muft argue on fuch topics before an affembly conftitutionally difpofed to a general confidence in them, that we fhould be fanguine indeed, did we but expect any confiderable check to be given to the poffible mifconduct of the Board of Controul, by the fears of a Parliamentary inquiry.

6thly, Because the operation of this bill, and of the act, the meaning of which it is to declare, ought to have been limited to the duration of the exifting charter. Whatever may be the right of the legiflature to fubject the trade and the general revenues of the Company to the infpection and controul of a Board of Commiffioners, nominated by the Crown, fo long as the Company continue in the enjoyment of an exclufive trade, and in the management of great territorial revenues; we muft, however, maintain, that in perpetuate fuch infpection, and to render the fignatures of that Board neceffary to all the Company's difpatches of every kind, when they may carry on their trade merely as a Commercial Corporation, without any monopoly, and when they may remain in the management only of their own proper eftates, is a meature of injuftice wholly unpre cedented, and an example liable to much reafonable jealoufy in a commercial country like Great Britain.

On all thefe grounds of objection; to the ftile and form of the bill, as a declaratory bill; to the incongruities, abfurdities, and deficiencies of the bill itself; to much of the principle, and to all the diftinguishing characters of the fyftem which it is meant to declare, as well as to the perpetual operation which it gives to that fyftem, we think it incumbent upon us, here folemnly on the Journals of Parliament, to record our hearty diffent For the fatisfaction of our confciences, and for our juftification to our fellow-citizens, and to pofterity. Portland,

Cariifle,

Devonshire, Cholmondeley,

Craven, Sandwich, Portchefter, Derby,

Bedford, Loughborough, Buckinghamshire,

Hay (Earl of Kinnoul.) SCOTLAND.

March 7. The Court of Seffion determined an important queftion, refpecting a freehold qualification.

The cafe was, that at the election of a member of Parliament for Fife, in July laft, Mr Henry Linfay claimed to be inrolled as a freeholder upon a charter of the barony of Wormifton, belonging to his brother Mr Bethune of Kilconquhar, and upon a conveyance of that charter, and of a part of the faid barony of the proper valuation, granted by Mr Bethune to him in life-rent, upon which he flood infeft.

Mr Dryfdale objected to Mr Lindsay's being inrolled, on the ground that the property of the barony of Wormiston' having been feued out by Mr Bethune to a friend (recently before expeding the charter) under condition of its being redifponed, it was plain it was done on purpose to feparate the property from the fuperiority, in order that the liferent of a bare fuperiority, divested of every beneficial intereft, might be given to Mr Lindfay, with the view of increafing Mr Bethune's political influence: that fuch qualifications were nominal and fictitious, and that the Court of Seffion had lately rejected claims founded

on fimilarities.

It was faid on the one hand, that though the lands for which Mr Lindsay claimed his vote, were worth rool. per annum, yet Mr Lindfay's intereft in them were only 2s. 6d.-that it was a fictitious conveyance to elude the law, that the expence of making the titles and the ex pence of this procefs was defrayed by Mr Bethune, and that it was clearly a nominal vote, as Mr Lindsay would reckon himself bound in honour to vote as his brother fhould direct. On the o ther hand it was faid, that there was no law depriving thofe acquiring eftates gratuitoufly, of the right of voting-that Mr Lindfay confidered the eftate in the fame light as if he had purchased it or received it by defcent, and found him felf at perfect liberty to vote as he thought proper.

In this fhape the precife queftion of the validity of a voter on liferent-right of a bare fuperiority, divested of every speci ality, came to be judged of by the Court, when, after a very full difcuffion, they found that Mr Lindsay's titles were hitficient,

ficient, and he was accordingly appointed to be admitted on the roll. It was the opinion of a majority of their Lordihips, that as titles fuch as thofe claimed on, had met with fupport, both in the Court of Seffion and the Houfe of Peers, the public had been led to give reliance on the law, as explained by thefe deciñons: that though a rectification of the election laws might be defirable, it was not their Lordfhips province to make new laws; that if the decifions given, in multitudes of fimilar cafes, which had been tried on former occafions, were to be altered, it would leave the country in fuch a flate of confufion and uncertainty, as might have very fatal effects.

MARRIAGES.

The Rev. Mr John Campbell, minifter at Kippen, to Mifs Christian Innes.

At the Countefs of Erroll's, the Earl of Glasgow to the Right Hon. Lady Augufta Hay, daugh. to the late Earl of Er. By fpecial licenfe, at Lord Macdonald's boufe in George's Street, Hanover Square, by the Bishop of Llandaff, Sir John Sin clair of Ulbfler, Bart. M. P. to the Hon. Mifs Macdonald.

At Leguinea, near Kington (Jamaica), Alexander Robertfon, Efq; Naval Of ficer there, to Mifs Sinclair of Durran, from Scotland.

BIRTHS.

Feb. 24. At London the Lady of Sir William Auguftus Cunnyngham, Bt. of Livingstone, of a fon,

26. The Right Hon. Lady Kinnaird of a fon, at his Lordship's houfe, London. March 4. The Lady of Sir James Colquhoun of Lufs, Bart. of a daughter at his houfe St Andrew's Square.

23. The Marchionefs of Tweedale of a fon.

Mrs Admiral Duncan, George's Square of a daughter.

Mrs Rudyerd, wife of Captain Rudyerd of the Royal Engineers, of a fon, at her houfe, Antigua Street.

DEATHS.

Mrs M. Turnbull, fpoufe of Mr Al. Laing architect.

At Dumfries, Mrs Jean Robertfon, relict of the late Rev. Mr R. Wight, minifter of the gospel in that place.

At Dumfries, Mr Eb. Wilson bookfel. At Aberdeen, Mifs Jean Allardes, daugh. of the late Mr Ja. Allardes, merch. At Charleville, in Champagne, Mrs Stuart Menzies of Culdairs, who in life was generally beloved, and in death is univerfally regretted.

Mifs Lillias Melvill, eldest daughter

of Major Jalin Melvill of Cairnie. At Biggar, Mr Geo. Bertram mercht. At Whiteriggs James Leith of White riggs, Etq.

At Brunflon, William M'Ilwrath of Kirkland, Efq.

At Rouen in Normandy, David Lord Rofchill.

Mis M.Sophia Grant, youngest daugh ter of Sir James Grant of Grant, Bart. At Dunfermline, Mrs Lillias Fergufon. At Edinburgh, Mifs Je. Cofhan, daughter of the deceated John Cofnan, Efq; At Glafgow, Mifs Suf. M'Lean, daugh ter of the deceafed Mr Jo. M'Lean, furg. At Dumfries, Mr Da. Robertfon, late Deacon of the incorporation of Skinners. At Edinburgh, Dr G. Rolland, fecond fon of Jo. Refan of achmithie.

At Edinb. Mr Jo. Kobertson writer. At his houfe of Jordinftoun, Perthshire, Admiral John Knight.

At London, Colone! Guy Johnson, his Majefly's Superintendant of the Indian Nations in North America.

At the Manfe of Lyne, in the county of Peebles, the Reverend Alexander John fton, Minister of that parish.

At Edinburgh, Mifs Marg. Aytoure, daugh. of the late Mr W. Aytoune, goldi. At Dundee, James Guthrie of Craigie, Efq; aged 90.

At Mauchline, Mrs Chriftian Wallace, daughter of the deceased Thomas Wallace Efq; of Cairnhill.

At Dumfries, Mrs M Ferguson of Ife At Edinb. Tho. Cuming, Eiq, banker, At San Lucar, Mr Alexander Tait. At Guernsey, Mr William Stark, fur. geon to the 44th regiment of foot.

At Perth, Mr Alexander Hunter, late merchant in London,

At the manfe of St Andrews, in Orkney, the Rev. Mr John Scolly, minifter of the united parishes of St Andrew's and Dearnes.

At Whitebank, Alexander Hay of Mordington, Efq;

At Dumfries, James Ramfay of Drungans, Efq; Collector of Excite there. At Glafgow Mifs Margaret Finlay, daughter of Mr John Finlay, writer. Mrs Camphell of Blythfwood.

At Perth Mrs Helen Ker, fpoufe to Mr J. Rutherford, wrtier in Perth.

At Marfeilles Mr Robert Milne, writer in Edinburgh.

At his houfe in Portman Square, London, Lieutenant-Colonel George Clerk:

Mr Blair Newall, third fon to J. Newall, Efq; of Barskeoch, at Rammerfcales. John Morrice Efq; of Craig, at Irvine,