-
Articles/Ads
Article PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. ← Page 4 of 10 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Parliamentary Proceedings.
country , he admitted , were great , but when it required twenty-four -millions for the support of one campaign , he had his doubts how long it could maintain it . His Lordship spoke a considerable time , and concluded by seconding the amendment . Lord Mulgrave rose , and went over the whole of the reign of Louis XIV . proceeding to the battle of Ramilies , and every other important victory gained , up to the present period ; drawing his conclusions , that under the most unfavourable circumstancesthe greatest battles have often proved successful to
, those who had suffered under the greatest misfortunes , which he trusted would be our case ; he therefore should support the Address . Several other Peers spoke for and against the question , ' ' and at three in the morning a division took place , Contents for the amendment 13 , Non-Contents JOS . Jan . 6 , 1795 . Earl Stanhope brought on a motion on the internal government of France , His Lordship began by stating , that the present was a most
important question : it was a question which he had been induced to submit to their Lordships' decision by the altered opinion of the country , and by theopening of the eyes of the people to their ruin and destruction . The eyes of their Lordship he trusted would also be opened ; but if the motion with which it was his intention to conclude his speech should be negatived , the door of negotiation would then be shut , and for ever . It was his intention to argue the subject with temper , though , indeed , he had not always found other persons argue with the same temper themselvesAs the House had but one object in
. view , the argument might be conducted with candour on both sides . He undertook to prove that the ruin of the French finances was impossible ; and consequently to do away and destroy the great argument which the Ministers had always deduced from what they alledged to be the exhausted state of French finances . However expedient therefore . his motion might be , it was not on the single ground of experience , or even of policy , that he meant to found his argumentsbut 011 the foundation ofsubstantial justiceWhat he had learnt in his
, . . youth , that justice was an indispensible duty , he should never forget , and if any tiling were proved to him to be just , that thing , he contended , ought to be done . The French had solemnly disclaimed the principle of interference in the government of other countries ; and from this he concluded , that the government of Great Britain had no right to interfere in the internal administration of France .
His Lordship , after endeavouring to prove that the objects of the war were unattainable , concluded by moving , " That this country ought not , and will not , interfere in the internal affairs of France ; and that it is expedient explicitly to declare the same . " A conversation took place amongst several of the Lords ; in the course of which , the Earl of Carlisle moved the question of adjournment ; on which the House divided , Contents 61 , Non-Contents 1 .
HOUSE OF COMMONS . Dec . 30 . The following newly elected Members were sworn in , and took their seats accordingly . Lord Dorchester , for Cricklade ; Charles Dundas , Esq . for Berks ; William Dundas , Esq . for the Burghs Sir John Frederick , Bart , for Surrey ; ot Anstruther , & c . Sir Henry Vane Tempest , Bart , for Hon . John Simpson , for Wenlock ; Durham city ; Henry StracheyEsqfor Bishop's Gabriel Tucker Stewart for
, . , Esq . Castle ; Weymouth ; Charles Chester , Esq . for Castle Rising ; Right Hon . William Wyndham , for Michael Hicks Beech , Esq . for Ciren- Norwich ; cester ; The Bill for preventing Clandestine Outlawries being read as usual , Mr . Sheridan , after apologising for the seeming violation of the accustomed forms
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Parliamentary Proceedings.
country , he admitted , were great , but when it required twenty-four -millions for the support of one campaign , he had his doubts how long it could maintain it . His Lordship spoke a considerable time , and concluded by seconding the amendment . Lord Mulgrave rose , and went over the whole of the reign of Louis XIV . proceeding to the battle of Ramilies , and every other important victory gained , up to the present period ; drawing his conclusions , that under the most unfavourable circumstancesthe greatest battles have often proved successful to
, those who had suffered under the greatest misfortunes , which he trusted would be our case ; he therefore should support the Address . Several other Peers spoke for and against the question , ' ' and at three in the morning a division took place , Contents for the amendment 13 , Non-Contents JOS . Jan . 6 , 1795 . Earl Stanhope brought on a motion on the internal government of France , His Lordship began by stating , that the present was a most
important question : it was a question which he had been induced to submit to their Lordships' decision by the altered opinion of the country , and by theopening of the eyes of the people to their ruin and destruction . The eyes of their Lordship he trusted would also be opened ; but if the motion with which it was his intention to conclude his speech should be negatived , the door of negotiation would then be shut , and for ever . It was his intention to argue the subject with temper , though , indeed , he had not always found other persons argue with the same temper themselvesAs the House had but one object in
. view , the argument might be conducted with candour on both sides . He undertook to prove that the ruin of the French finances was impossible ; and consequently to do away and destroy the great argument which the Ministers had always deduced from what they alledged to be the exhausted state of French finances . However expedient therefore . his motion might be , it was not on the single ground of experience , or even of policy , that he meant to found his argumentsbut 011 the foundation ofsubstantial justiceWhat he had learnt in his
, . . youth , that justice was an indispensible duty , he should never forget , and if any tiling were proved to him to be just , that thing , he contended , ought to be done . The French had solemnly disclaimed the principle of interference in the government of other countries ; and from this he concluded , that the government of Great Britain had no right to interfere in the internal administration of France .
His Lordship , after endeavouring to prove that the objects of the war were unattainable , concluded by moving , " That this country ought not , and will not , interfere in the internal affairs of France ; and that it is expedient explicitly to declare the same . " A conversation took place amongst several of the Lords ; in the course of which , the Earl of Carlisle moved the question of adjournment ; on which the House divided , Contents 61 , Non-Contents 1 .
HOUSE OF COMMONS . Dec . 30 . The following newly elected Members were sworn in , and took their seats accordingly . Lord Dorchester , for Cricklade ; Charles Dundas , Esq . for Berks ; William Dundas , Esq . for the Burghs Sir John Frederick , Bart , for Surrey ; ot Anstruther , & c . Sir Henry Vane Tempest , Bart , for Hon . John Simpson , for Wenlock ; Durham city ; Henry StracheyEsqfor Bishop's Gabriel Tucker Stewart for
, . , Esq . Castle ; Weymouth ; Charles Chester , Esq . for Castle Rising ; Right Hon . William Wyndham , for Michael Hicks Beech , Esq . for Ciren- Norwich ; cester ; The Bill for preventing Clandestine Outlawries being read as usual , Mr . Sheridan , after apologising for the seeming violation of the accustomed forms