fer to the decision of the present judge of the admiralty court in the case of the American ship the Sampson. That ship had been captured by a Spanish privateer, and on her way to a Spanish port was relieved by a British cruizer. The question was, whether salvage should be allowed, the general principle being, that no salvage should be allowed where the neutral was in no danger, but must have been set at liberty when arrived in port. His lordship read the decision where a view was taken of the probable meaning of the Decree of France. The answer to general Armstrong was adverted to, and pronounced to be a most weak and flimsy production of the minister of marine, an officer similar to our first lord of the admiralty.

The

French decree made no exception in favour of America, and was so understood by the commander of the Spanish privateer. And, although the judge had not seen the Spanish Decree, it was natural to conclude that it would be the same as that of France. With respect to certificates of origin, his lordship observed, that the noble baron (Grenville) had compared them to things from which they were totally different. The Mediterranean passes were merely papers stating that such and such vessels were our property, in order to protect them from the Barbary cruizers. The certificates required by our navigation laws were papers to shew that the vessels, &c. actually belonged to the countries from which they came. But these certificates of origin were given to shew that such and such vessels and cargoes were not British property, granted with a view directly hostile to us, and signed by persons who could have no object at the ports at which they were stationed, except a hostile one to us. It was doubtful whether vessels carrying such certificates would not, by the law of nations, be liable to confiscation without our Orders in Council.

Lord Erskine observed, that the noble lords on the other side had not even attempted to answer the arguments of his noble friend, but had run away from the question; he adverted to the decision in the case of the Sampson, and said that it was the most extraordinary that ever was heard of, since the judge had avowed that he had never seen the Spanish Decree, upon which that decision must have been founded. He did not impute this to his learned friend, the judge of the admiralty court; but to this Sampson who had been

strong enough to pull down sir W. Scott, the law of the land, and the law of nations. He then proceeded to vindicate his construction of the statutes, and affirmed, that no language could be more precise in favour of the opinion which he had stated. He repeated the arguments respecting the right of retaliation. We had no right to retaliate through the medium of a neutral, except that state was too weak to resist, or shewed a disposition to acquiesce. But America had shewn every disposition to resist. There was no proof of her acquiescence, and in fact the decree had not been put in execution against her, in the sense which ministers ascribed to it.-The house then divided on the question.

Contents... 30... Proxies 31-61 Not Contents 67 .... 60-127.

Majority against the Resolutions—66.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Thursday, March 8.

GREENWICH HOSPITAL, AND NAVAL ASY. LUM.] Sir C. Pole, pursuant to notice, rose to submit his motion to the house, founded upon the 14th Report of the commissioners of Naval Inquiry. The object of the bill, which he had to propose, was to carry into effect, both the spirit and letter of the charter of Greenwich Hospital. Before he proceeded to make his motion, he begged that the report of the commissioners, who had been appointed on a former occasion to inquire into the state of that hospital, should be read. By the charter of the hospital, which was granted in the 16th Geo. iii. it was required, that all the officers of the hospital should be persons who had served his majesty in the navy, and had lost limbs or been disabled in the service. The provisions of the charter it appeared had not been complied with; ! but it was not the object of his bill to interfere with any of the existing appointments, or emoluments; its sole purpose being to provide that the charter should in future be complied with both in letter and in spirit. Another part of his bill would provide for a public saving, by requiring persons holding such offices to give up their half pay. His bill was also to extend to the institution of the Naval Asylum, which had been established for the encouragement of the naval service, and if ever there had been a time when they ought to do every thing consistent with economy and the interest of the service for that object, it was the present. These were the

from, and therefore there was a necessity | unfitness of naval men for the offices in for the interference of parliament. He the Hospital, he never could forget that suggested, therefore, to the hon. bart. the late lord chancellor had been in that whether he ought not to separate the ob- profession. jects of his bill, and move, in the first instance, for a bill to regulate Greenwich Hospital; and afterwards, if it should be necessary, bring forward a motion for a bill to regulate the Naval Asylum.

right hon. gent. opposite (Mr. Windham) | the prior strength of the army. From the had not, very causelessly, in his opinion, taken alarm, as if this motion contained in it a principle ruinous to the military system introduced by that right hon. gent. a short time since. To many parts of the right hon. gent.'s system he had no objection; the inducements held forth to certain descriptions of men, by the liberty to engage for limited service and by the creation of additional pensions, he highly approved of. But what he complained of was, that the right hon. gent. considered his measure as prescriptive, to be preserved without addition or alteration, contrary to what had ever happened with respect to any other measure. He had no objection to limited service, and he had formerly promoted to a certain extent, engagements limited in space as well as in time. But why should limited service be in a manner enforced, to the total exclusion of unlimited service, even when the men were perfectly satisfied, and desirous to enter without limitation. On former occasions, the men for limited service were kept in separate battalions. The right hon. gent. mixed them. It was not intended to interfere with this any more than with any other part of the right hon. gent.'s arrangement. The right hon. gent. complained much of the change about to be introduced in the exclusive form of his measure but no measure, no military system, could reasonably claim an exclusive and unalterable sanction. The right hon. gent. might hold himself discharged from all responsibility for his measure, after the alterations proposed to be introduced. All responsibility in matters of this kind, belonged properly, if not exclusively, to those who were bound to supply every thing that was deficient, to correct every thing that was vicious in the existing system. The house would form its judgment without any of that alarm which the right hon. gentleman felt, in his opinion without any ground. The right hon. gent. had no right to complain of this as a premature interference with his measure. The right hon. gent's. system was as prematurely and abruptly introduced to the abrogation of the Additional Force act, then growing into full efficiency. The right hon. gent.'s measure had been passed two years ago, and had been in operation twenty months; and when the returns should be examined, it would be found distinct from every other in this respect, that it made no addition to

year 1803, to the present time, the army had been, year after year, progressively increased from 232,000 men to 291,000, exclusive of 10,000 which were wanting to complete the militia, and which would be furnished in the course of the next month. In this progressive increase, the right hon. gent.'s administration had added but 6 or 7,000 men, which were derived from the Additional Force act, and therefore not to be attributed to the right hon. gent.'s measure. The regular disposable force was, in 1804, in number 141,000, and in 1808 it was 204,000; of which the right hon. gent. could claim credit only for the beforementioned 6000, derived from the Additional Force act. In the 18 months preceding the commencement of the operation of the right hon. gent.'s measure, 30,748 men were raised. In the 18 months during which that measure had been effective, the number raised was only 26,040 being a diminution of 4,000. In point of comparative value it was to be considered, that of the preceding number 17,000 entered at once for unlimited service,and the remaining 14,000, though entering at first for limited service, afterwards extended their engagements without limitation. He repeated, that he was of opinion the principle of limited service ought always to make part of our military code; and he was satisfied, that without it, the numbers of our army could not be kept up. But let it be seriously considered, what would be the consequence of making it the exclusive principle. With no less than 90,000 men now employed in foreign and colonial service, how would it be possible to maintain an efficient army in our distant possessions, if it would be necessary to bring home the men at the termination of a short period of service. Every soldier sent to India cost 1001. for his conveyance out and home; and if a regiment was to be sent out, the whole, or the greater part of which would be to be brought back at the end of 3 years; he begged the house to consider how little service would be had for so enormous an expence. He allowed, that a limited engagement might answer very well for European service. But all he wished was, a fair option to the individual to form his engagement, so that some portion of our army, and that as large a portion as might be, should consist of men engaged for life. Let it be considered how large a portion of our army was already engaged for limited service

| gent.'s plan was not speculative, and that was the permanent burthen of 450,000l. a year which it imposed on the country, in the shape of additional pensions, an incumbrance which must increase continually. These reasons, he conceived, would be fully sufficient to satisfy the committee of the propriety of not depriving such men as were inclined, of a fair option to enlist for life. He therefore moved, that a clause be introduced allowing that option.

Mr. Windham spoke at considerable length against the clause, the substance of which he contended, was not only mischievous in itself, but also as it was intended to do away the system established two years since with the full approbation of the house, after long and deliberate consideration and mature discussion.--He objected to the mode in which that system was thus covertly undermined, by those who did not dare to make it the object of open attack. A clause of this kind was rejected in 1806, because it went to counteract the general effect of the measure; and a great part of the house had declared the same opinion since. He did not complain that this proceeding was brought forward in the shape of a Clause in the Mutiny Bill, but that it was brought forward in so late a stage, without any notice, and at a time when the Mutiny Bill must be passed with so little delay as to allow no adequate length of deliberation or discussion. It was only on this day se'nnight that an indistinct declaration of his intentions on this head was wrung from the noble lord by him; and only last night that he had seen the noble lord's motion in the form in which it was to be offered to the house. His measure had been, like the present, brought forward in the shape of a clause in the Mutiny Bill. But the nature of that measure had long before been detailed to the house, and the clause itself had been printed and circulated among the mem

only; and here he could not help expressing his satisfaction, that it was not now the object of consideration how an army was to be raised, but how a very flourishing army already in existence should be maintained. The present regular army of the line consisted of 204,000 men, and he was sorry to say, that of these, including the men enlisted under the right hon. gent.'s measure, full 70,000 were engaged for limited service. The number raised under the right hon. gent.'s measure was 26,000, and they were all for limited service. All the foreign corps were, from their origin, engaged for limited service; the garrison battalions were also limited; and the volunteers from the militia, with the exception of 6 or 7,000. It was matter of very serious consideration, to think that the 36,000 enlisted this year would all be entitled to their discharge at the same period, seven years hence. It was also very material to consider how this principle, ifexclusively acted upon, would affect our peace establishment. Supposing a peace establishment of 100,000 men, and 36,000 of these to be discharged in one year, and a war to follow in that year or the next, what would be the state of the country. He contended that the right hon. gent.'s measure would not cover its own waste, and that of the army in general. He maintained that the enlistment for life of those who, on having the option should prefer engaging for life, would not discourage others from engaging for years. He could not understand how good faith was violated, when no extension of an existing engagement for limited service was demanded or allowed, and when all that was intended was to allow a liberty of a larger engagement to those who were free and willing to make it. The right hon. gent. opposite might say, that though the ordinary recruiting under his measure was not equally productive as the ordinary recruiting before, combined with the Additional Force act, it was superior to the previous ordinary re-bers, and repeatedly discussed, long before cruiting alone. Certainly so it was; but then the Additional Force act was becoming every day more productive, when it was repealed. The ordinary recruiting was made more productive under the right hon. gent's plan, by multiplying the number of recruiting parties beyond measure, and also by the threat of reduction held out to the 54 additional battalions, unless they should complete their establishment to 400 men each before six months. One part only of the right hon.

the house was called to decide upon it. The present proceeding was like putting a parcel into the hands of the driver of a stage coach, while he was yet going on, with a hint that he should suffer no one to examine its contents, but plead, against every call to stop, the lateness of the hour and the necessity of his arrival at the appointed minute. It was a species of proceeding which he supposed he must not call a trick, but which, in strict legal definition, he must be allowed to call a fraud,