That this is, in reality, the state of a sailor in time of war, I think, sir, too evident to require proof; nor do I see what reply can be made to the sailor's artless expostulation.
I know not why the sailors alone should serve their country to their disadvantage, and be expected to encounter danger without the incitement of a reward.
Nor will any part of the hardships of this clause be alleviated by the expedient suggested by an honourable member, who spoke, some time ago, of granting, or allowing, to a sailor, whose contract shall be void, what our courts of law should adjudge him to deserve, a quantum meruit: for, according to the general interpretation of our statutes, it will be determined that he has forfeited his whole claim by illegal contract. To instance, sir, the statute of usury. He that stipulates for higher interest than is allowed, is not able to recover his legal demand, but irrecoverably forfeits the whole.
Thus, sir, an unhappy sailor who shall innocently transgress this law, must lose all the profit of his voyage, and have nothing to relieve him after his fatigues; but when he has by his courage repelled the enemy, and, by his skill, escaped storms and rocks, must suffer yet severer hardships, in being subject to a forfeiture where he expected applause, comfort, and recompense.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL spoke next, to this purport:—Sir, the clause before us cannot, in my opinion, produce any such dreadful consequences as the learned gentleman appears to imagine: however, to remove all difficulties, I have drawn up an amendment, which I shall beg leave to propose, that the contracts which may be affected as the clause now stands, shall be void only as to so much of the wages as shall exceed the sum to which the house shall agree to reduce the seamen's pay; and, as to the forfeitures, they are not to be levied upon the sailors, but upon the merchants, or trading companies, who employ them, and who are able to pay greater sums without being involved in poverty and distress.
With regard, sir, to the reasons for introducing this clause, they are, in my judgment, valid and equitable. We have found it necessary to fix the rate of money at interest, and the rate of labour in several cases, and if we do not in this case, what will be the consequence?—a second embargo on commerce, and, perhaps, a total stop to all military preparations. Is it reasonable that any man should rate his labour according to the immediate necessities of those that employ him? or that he should raise his own fortune by the publick calamities? If this has hitherto been a practice, it is a practice contrary to the general happiness of society, and ought to prevail no longer.
If the sailor, sir, is exposed to greater dangers in time of war, is not the merchant's trade carried on, likewise, at greater hazard? Is not the freight, equally with the sailors, threatened at once by the ocean and the enemy? And is not the owner's fortune equally impaired, whether the ship is dashed upon a rock, or seized by a privateer?
The merchant, therefore, has as much reason for paying less wages in time of war, as the sailor for demanding more, and nothing remains but that the legislative power determine a medium between their different interests, with justice, if possible, at least with impartiality.
Mr. Horace WALPOLE, who had stood up several times, but was prevented by other members, spoke next, to this purport:—Sir, I was unwilling to interrupt the course of this debate while it was carried on with calmness and decency, by men, who do not suffer the ardour of opposition to cloud their reason, or transport them to such expressions as the dignity of this assembly does not admit. I have hitherto deferred to answer the gentleman who declaimed against the bill with such fluency of rhetorick, and such vehemence of gesture; who charged the advocates for the expedients now proposed, with having no regard to any interest but their own, and with making laws only to consume paper, and threatened them with the defection of their adherence, and the loss of their influence, upon this new discovery of their folly and their ignorance.
Nor, sir, do I now answer him for any other purpose than to remind him how little the clamours of rage and petulancy of invectives contribute to the purposes for which this assembly is called together; how little the discovery of truth is promoted, and the security of the nation established by pompous diction and theatrical emotions.
Formidable sounds, and furious declamations, confident assertions, and lofty periods, may affect the young and unexperienced; and, perhaps, the gentleman may have contracted his habits of oratory by conversing more with those of his own age, than with such as have had more opportunities of acquiring knowledge, and more successful methods of communicating their sentiments.
If the heat of his temper, sir, would suffer him to attend to those whose age and long acquaintance with business give them an indisputable right to deference and superiority, he would learn, in time, to reason rather than declaim, and to prefer justness of argument, and an accurate knowledge of facts, to sounding epithets and splendid superlatives, which may disturb the imagination for a moment, but leave no lasting impression on the mind.
He will learn, sir, that to accuse and prove are very different, and that reproaches, unsupported by evidence, affect only the character of him that utters them. Excursions of fancy, and flights of oratory, are, indeed, pardonable in young men, but in no other; and it would surely contribute more, even to the purpose for which some gentlemen appear to speak, that of depreciating the conduct of the administration, to prove the inconveniencies and injustice of this bill, than barely to assert them, with whatever magnificence of language, or appearance of zeal, honesty, or compassion.
Mr. PITT replied:—Sir, the atrocious crime of being a young man, which the honourable gentleman has with such spirit and decency charged upon me, I shall neither attempt to palliate nor deny, but content myself with wishing that I may be one of those whose follies may cease with their youth, and not of that number, who are ignorant in spite of experience.
Whether youth can be imputed to any man as a reproach, I will not, sir, assume the province of determining; but surely age may become justly contemptible, if the opportunities which it brings have passed away without improvement, and vice appears to prevail when the passions have subsided. The wretch that, after having seen the consequences of a thousand errours, continues still to blunder, and whose age has only added obstinacy to stupidity, is surely the object of either abhorrence or contempt, and deserves not that his grey head should secure him from insults.
Much more, sir, is he to be abhorred, who, as he has advanced in age, has receded from virtue, and becomes more wicked with less temptation; who prostitutes himself for money which he cannot enjoy, and spends the remains of his life in the ruin of his country.
But youth, sir, is not my only crime; I have been accused of acting a theatrical part—a theatrical part may either imply some peculiarities of gesture, or a dissimulation of my real sentiments, and an adoption of the opinions and language of another man.
In the first sense, sir, the charge is too trifling to be confuted, and deserves only to be mentioned, that it may be despised. I am at liberty, like every other man, to use my own language; and though I may, perhaps, have some ambition to please this gentleman, I shall not lay myself under any restraint, nor very solicitously copy his diction, or his mien, however matured by age, or modelled by experience.
If any man shall, by charging me with theatrical behaviour, imply that I utter any sentiments but my own, I shall treat him as a calumniator and a villain; nor shall any protection shelter him from the treatment which he deserves. I shall, on such an occasion, without scruple, trample upon all those forms, with which wealth and dignity intrench themselves, nor shall any thing but age restrain my resentment: age, which always brings one privilege, that of being insolent and supercilious without punishment.
But, with regard, sir, to those whom I have offended, I am of opinion, that if I had acted a borrowed part, I should have avoided their censure; the heat that offended them is the ardour of conviction, and that zeal for the service of my country, which neither hope nor fear shall influence me to suppress. I will not sit unconcerned while my liberty is invaded, nor look in silence upon publick robbery. I will exert my endeavours, at whatever hazard, to repel the aggressor, and drag the thief to justice, whoever may protect them in their villany, and whoever may partake of their plunder. And if the honourable gentleman—
Here Mr. WINNINGTON called to order, and Mr. PITT sitting down, he spoke thus:—It is necessary, sir, that the order of this assembly be observed, and the debate resumed without personal altercations. Such expressions as have been vented on this occasion, become not an assembly intrusted with the liberty and welfare of their country. To interrupt the debate on a subject so important as that before us, is, in some measure, to obstruct the publick happiness, and violate our trust: but much more heinous is the crime of exposing our determinations to contempt, and inciting the people to suspicion or mutiny, by indecent reflections, or unjust insinuations.
I do not, sir, undertake to decide the controversy between the two gentlemen, but must be allowed to observe, that no diversity of opinion can justify the violation of decency, and the use of rude and virulent expressions; expressions dictated only by resentment, and uttered without regard to—
Mr. PITT called to order, and said:—Sir, if this be to preserve order, there is no danger of indecency from the most licentious tongue: for what calumny can be more atrocious, or what reproach more severe, than that of speaking with regard to any thing but truth. Order may sometimes be broken by passion, or inadvertency, but will hardly be reestablished by monitors like this, who cannot govern his own passion, whilst he is restraining the impetuosity of others.
Happy, sir, would it be for mankind, if every one knew his own province; we should not then see the same man at once a criminal and a judge. Nor would this gentleman assume the right of dictating to others what he has not learned himself.
That I may return, in some degree, the favour which he intends me, I will advise him never hereafter to exert himself on the subject of order; but, whenever he finds himself inclined to speak on such occasions, to remember how he has now succeeded, and condemn, in silence, what his censures will never reform.
Mr. WINNINGTON replied:—Sir, as I was hindered by the gentleman's ardour and impetuosity from concluding my sentence, none but myself can know the equity or partiality of my intentions, and, therefore, as I cannot justly be condemned, I ought to be supposed innocent; nor ought he to censure a fault of which he cannot be certain that it would ever have been committed.
He has, indeed, exalted himself to a degree of authority never yet assumed by any member of this house, that of condemning others to silence. I am henceforward, by his inviolable decree, to sit and hear his harangues without daring to oppose him. How wide he may extend his authority, or whom he will proceed to include in the same sentence, I shall not determine; having not yet arrived at the same degree of sagacity with himself, nor being able to foreknow what another is going to pronounce.
If I had given offence by any improper sallies of passion, I ought to have been censured by the concurrent voice of the assembly, or have received a reprimand, sir, from you, to which I should have submitted without opposition; but I will not be doomed to silence by one who has no pretensions to authority, and whose arbitrary decisions can only tend to introduce uproar, discord, and confusion.
Mr. Henry PELHAM next rose up, and spoke to this effect:—Sir, when, in the ardour of controversy upon interesting questions, the zeal of the disputants hinders them from a nice observation of decency and regularity, there is some indulgence due to the common weakness of our nature; nor ought any gentleman to affix to a negligent expression a more offensive sense than is necessarily implied by it.
To search deep, sir, for calumnies and reproaches is no laudable nor beneficial curiosity; it must always be troublesome to ourselves by alarming us with imaginary injuries, and may often be unjust to others by charging them with invectives which they never intended. General candour and mutual tenderness will best preserve our own quiet, and support that dignity which has always been accounted essential to national debates, and seldom infringed without dangerous consequences.
Mr. LYTTLETON spoke as follows:—Sir, no man can be more zealous for decency than myself, or more convinced of the necessity of a methodical prosecution of the question before us. I am well convinced how near indecency and faction are to one another, and how inevitably confusion produces obscurity; but I hope it will always be remembered, that he who first infringes decency, or deviates from method, is to answer for all the consequences that may arise from the neglect of senatorial customs: for it is not to be expected that any man will bear reproaches without reply, or that he who wanders from the question will not be followed in his digressions, and hunted through his labyrinths.
It cannot, sir, be denied, that some insinuations were uttered injurious to those whose zeal may sometimes happen to prompt them to warm declarations, or incite them to passionate emotions. Whether I am of importance enough to be included in the censure, I despise it too much to inquire or consider, but cannot forbear to observe, that zeal for the right can never become reproachful, and that no man can fall into contempt but those who deserve it.
[The clause was amended, and agreed to.]
HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 13, 1740-1
The seventieth day of the session being appointed for the report from the committee on the bill for the increase and encouragement of sailors, sir John BARNARD presented a petition from the merchants of London, and spoke as follows:—
Sir, this petition I am directed to lay before this house by many of the principal merchants of that great city which I have the honour to represent; men too wise to be terrified with imaginary dangers, and too honest to endeavour the obstruction of any measures that may probably advance the publick good, merely because they do not concur with their private interest; men, whose knowledge and capacity enable them to judge rightly, and whose acknowledged integrity and spirit set them above the suspicion of concealing their sentiments.
I therefore present this petition in the name of the merchants of London, in full confidence that it will be found to deserve the regard of this assembly, though I am, equally with the other members, a stranger to what it contains; for it is my opinion that a representative is to lay before the house the sentiments of his constituents, whether they agree with his own or not, and that, therefore, it would have been superfluous to examine the petition, which, though I might not wholly have approved it, I had no right to alter.
The petition was read, and is as follows:
"The humble petition of the merchants and traders of the city of London—showeth, that your petitioners are informed a bill is depending in this honourable house, for the encouragement and increase of seamen, and for the better and speedier manning his majesty's fleet, in which are clauses, that, should the bill pass into a law, your petitioners apprehend will be highly detrimental to the trade and navigation of this kingdom, by discouraging persons from entering into or being bred to the sea service, and entirely prevent the better and speedier manning his majesty's fleet, by giving the seamen of Great Britain, and of all other his majesty's dominions, a distaste of serving on board the royal navy.
"That your petitioners conceive nothing can be of so bad consequence to the welfare and defence of this nation, as the treating so useful and valuable a body of men, who are its natural strength and security, like criminals of the highest nature, and so differently from all other his majesty's subjects; and at the same time are persuaded, that the only effectual and speedy method of procuring, for the service of his majesty's fleet, a proportionable number of the sailors in this kingdom, is to distinguish that body of men by bounties and encouragements, both present and future, and by abolishing all methods of severity and ill usage, particularly that practice whereby they are deprived, after long and hazardous voyages, of enjoying, for a short space of time, the comforts of their families, and equal liberty with other their fellow-subjects in their native country.
"That your petitioners believe it will not be difficult to have such methods pointed out as will tend to supply the present necessities, and at the same time effectually promote the increase of seamen, when this honourable house shall think fit to inquire into a matter of such high importance to the naval power, trade, and riches of this kingdom.
"That your petitioners are convinced this bill will not only be ineffectual to answer the ends proposed by it, but will be destructive of the liberties of all his majesty's subjects, as it empowers any parish officer, accompanied with an unlimited number of persons, at any hour, by day or by night, to force open the dwelling-houses, warehouses, or other places, provided for the security and defence of their lives and fortunes, contrary to the undoubted liberties of the people of Great Britain, and the laws of this land.
"In consideration, therefore, of the premises, and of the particular prejudices, hardships, and dangers, which must inevitably attend your petitioners, and all others the merchants and traders of this kingdom, should this bill pass into a law, your petitioners most humbly pray this honourable house, that they may be heard by their counsel against the said clauses in the said bill."
Mr. BATHURST then presented a petition, and spoke as follows:—Sir, the alarm which the bill, now depending, has raised, is not confined to the city of London, or to any particular province of the king's dominions; the whole nation is thrown into commotions, and the effects of the law now proposed, are dreaded, far and wide, as a general calamity. Every town which owes its trade and its provisions to navigation, apprehends the approach of poverty and scarcity, and those which are less immediately affected, consider the infraction of our liberties as a prelude to their destruction. Happy would it be, if we, who are intrusted with their interest, could find any arguments to convince them that their terrour was merely panick.
That these fears have already extended their influence to the county which I represent, the petition which I now beg leave to lay before the house, will sufficiently evince; and I hope their remonstrances will prevail with this assembly to remove the cause of their disquiet, by rejecting the bill.
This was entitled "a petition of several gentlemen, freeholders, and other inhabitants of the county of Gloucester, in behalf of themselves, and all other, the freeholders of the said county," setting forth, in substance, "That the petitioners being informed that a bill was depending in this house, for the encouragement and increase of seamen, and for the better and speedier manning his majesty's fleet, containing several clauses which, should the bill pass into a law, would, as the petitioners apprehend, impose hardships upon the people too heavy to be borne, and create discontents in the minds of his majesty's subjects; would subvert all the rights and privileges of a Briton; and overturn Magna Charta itself, the basis on which they are built; and, by these means, destroy that very liberty, for the preservation of which the present royal family was established upon the throne of Britain; for which reasons, such a law could never be obeyed, or much blood would be shed in consequence of it."
Mr. Henry PELHAM then spoke, to this purport:—Sir, I have attended to this petition with the utmost impartiality, and have endeavoured to affix, to every period, the most innocent sense; but cannot forbear to declare it as my opinion, that it is far distant from the style of submission and request: instead of persuading, they attempt to intimidate us, and menace us with no less than bloodshed and rebellion. They make themselves the judges of our proceedings, and appeal, from our determinations, to their own opinion, and declare that they will obey no longer than they approve.
If such petitions as these, sir, are admitted; if the legislature shall submit to receive laws, and subjects resume, at pleasure, the power with which the government is vested, what is this assembly but a convention of empty phantoms, whose determinations are nothing more than a mockery of state?
Every insult upon this house is a violation of our constitution; and the constitution, like every other fabrick, by being often battered, must fall at last. It is, indeed, already destroyed, if there be, in the nation, any body of men who shall, with impunity, refuse to comply with the laws, plead the great charter of liberty against those powers that made it, and fix the limits of their own obedience.
I cannot, sir, pass over, in silence, the mention of the king, whose title to the throne, and the reasons for which he was exalted to it, are set forth with uncommon art and spirit of diction; but spirit, which, in my opinion, appears not raised by zeal, but by sedition; and which, therefore, it is our province to repress.
That his majesty reigns for the preservation of liberty, will be readily confessed; but how shall we be able to preserve it, if his laws are not obeyed?
Let us, therefore, in regard to the dignity of the assembly, to the efficacy of our determinations, and the security of our constitution, discourage all those who shall address us for the future, on this or any other occasion, from speaking in the style of governours and dictators, by refusing that this petition should be laid on the table.
[The question was put, and it was agreed, by the whole house, that it should not lie on the table.]
Mr. Henry PELHAM rose up again, and spoke thus:—Sir, I cannot but congratulate the house upon the unanimity with which this petition, a petition of which I speak in the softest language, when I call it irreverent and disrespectful, has been refused the regard commonly paid to the remonstrances of our constituents, whose rights I am far from desiring to infringe, when I endeavour to regulate their conduct, and recall them to their duty.
This is an occasion, on which it is, in my opinion, necessary to exert our authority with confidence and vigour, as the spirit of opposition must always be proportioned to that of the attack. Let us, therefore, not only refuse to this petition the usual place on our table, but reject it as unworthy of this house.
[The question was put, and the petition rejected, with scarcely any opposition.]
The house then entered upon the consideration of the bill, and when the report was made from the committee, and the blanks filled up, sir William YONGE spoke, in the following manner:—
Sir, the bill has been brought, by steady perseverance and diligent attention, to such perfection, that much more important effects may be expected from it than from any former law for the same purpose, if it be executed with the same calmness and resolution, the same contempt of popular clamour, and the same invariable and intrepid adherence to the publick good, that has been shown in forming and defending it.
But what can we hope from this, or any other law, if particular men, who cannot be convinced of its expedience, shall not only refuse to obey it, but declare their design of obstructing the execution of it? shall determine to retire from the sphere of their authority, rather than exercise it in compliance with the decree of the senate, and threaten, in plain terms, to call the country in to their assistance, and to pour the rabble by thousands upon those who shall dare to do their duty, and obey their governours?
Such declarations as these, sir, are little less than sallies of rebellion; and, if they pass without censure, will, perhaps, produce such commotions as may require to be suppressed by other means than forms of law and senatorial censures.
Nor do I think that, by rejecting the petition, we have sufficiently established our authority; for, in my opinion, we yielded too much in receiving it. The bill before us whatever may be its title, is, in reality, a money bill; a bill, by which aids are granted to the crown; and we have, therefore, no necessity of rejecting petitions on this occasion, because the standing orders of the house forbid us to admit them.
They then proceeded to the amendments, and when the clause for limiting the wages of seamen was read, sir John BARNARD rose up, and spoke to this effect:—
Sir, we are now to consider the clause to which the petition relates, which I have now presented, a petition on a subject of so general importance, and offered by men so well acquainted with every argument that can be offered, and every objection which can be raised, that their request of being heard by their council cannot be denied, without exposing us to the censure of adhering obstinately to our own opinions, of shutting our ears against information, of preferring expedition to security, and disregarding the welfare of our country.
It will not be necessary to defer our determinations on this clause for more than three days, though we should gratify this just and common request. And will not this loss be amply compensated by the satisfaction of the people, for whose safety we are debating, and by the consciousness that we have neglected nothing which might contribute to the efficacy of our measures?
The merchants, sir, do not come before us with loud remonstrances and harassing complaints, they do not apply to our passions, but our understandings, and offer such informations as will very much facilitate the publick service. It has been frequent, in the course of this debate, to hear loud demands for better expedients, and more efficacious, than those which have been proposed; and is it to be conceived that those who called thus eagerly for new proposals, intended not to inform themselves, but to silence their opponents?
From whom, sir, are the best methods for the prosecution of naval affairs to be expected, but from those whose lives are spent in the study of commerce, whose fortunes depend upon the knowledge of the sea, and who will, most probably, exert their abilities in contriving expedients to promote the success of the war, than they whom the miscarriage of our fleets must irreparably ruin?
The merchants, sir, are enabled by their profession to inform us—are deterred by their interest from deceiving us; they have, like all other subjects, a right to be heard on any question; and a better right than any other when their interest is more immediately affected; and, therefore, to refuse to hear them, will be, at once, impolitick and cruel; it will discover, at the same time, a contempt of the most valuable part of our fellow-subjects, and an inflexible adherence to our own opinions.
The expedient of asserting this to be a money bill, by which the just remonstrances of the merchants are intended to be eluded, is too trivial and gross to be adopted by this assembly: if this bill can be termed a money bill, and no petitions are, therefore, to be admitted against it, I know not any bill relating to the general affairs of the nation which may not plead the same title to an exemption from petitions.
I therefore desire that the consideration of this clause may be deferred for two days, that the arguments of the merchants may be examined, and that this affair may not be determined without the clearest knowledge and exactest information.
Sir Robert WALPOLE spoke next, to this effect:—Sir, the petition, whether justifiable or not, with regard to the occasion on which it is presented, or the language in which it is expressed, is certainly offered at an improper time, and, therefore, can lay no claim to the regard of this assembly.
The time prescribed, by the rules of this house, for the reception of petitions, is that at which the bill is first introduced, not at which it is to be finally determined.
The petition before us is said not to regard the bill in general, but a particular clause; and it is, therefore, asserted, that it may now properly be heard: but this plea will immediately vanish, when it shall be made appear that the clause is not mentioned in it, and that there is no particular relation between that and the petition, which I shall attempt—
Here sir John BARNARD, remarking that sir Robert WALPOLE had the petition in his hand, rose, and said:—Sir, I rise thus abruptly to preserve the order of this assembly, and to prevent any gentleman from having, in this debate, any other advantage, above the rest, than that of superiour abilities, or more extensive knowledge.
The petition was not ordered, by the house, to be placed in the right honourable gentleman's hand, but on the table; nor has he a right to make use of any other means for his information, than are in the power of any other member: if he is in doubt upon any particulars contained in it, he may move that the clerk should read it to the house.
Sir Robert WALPOLE laid down the paper; Mr. PELHAM rose, and said:—Sir, I am so far from thinking the rules of the house asserted, that, in my opinion, the right of the members is infringed by this peremptory demand. Is it not, in the highest degree, requisite, that he who is about to reason upon the petition should acquaint himself with the subject on which he is to speak.