1

1716.

The feptennial bill pro

pofed.

feized-Parliament meets--Scheme of an intended invafion and rebellion-Debate at Oxford about an addrefs-Debates in parliament-Divifion among the Whigs--Changes in the ministry—A fleet fent to the Baltic-Inquiry about the Dutch forces-Measures for reducing the public debts-Refolutions about it-The general fund-Act for the finking fund conftituted.

HE rebellion was now quelled, and the strength of the rebels intirely broken, but the difaffection of the people was not yet conquered. The

⚫ parliament was the bulwark of the crown; the

vigour and unanimity of the king's friends, and their fupe-
riority in the house, was the fupport of the whole affair.
But the parliament being only of three years continuance,
by virtue of the Triennial Act, made in the 6th year of
king William and queen Mary; all the hopes of the other
party feemed to be centered in this, that the parliament
would expire; and that they fhould be able, by their influ-
ence in the country, to chufe a majority of their party at the
next election; or raife fuch a ferment at that juncture, as
might make way
for a fuccefsful invafion from abroad. This
the perfons at the helm obferved with concern; and there-
fore refolved to baffle thefe hopes of the enemies of the
government, by prolonging the fitting of the prefent par-
liament. It is faid, it was firft propofed only to fufpend the
Triennial Act for once, whereby this parliament would
have continued three years beyond the time, at which it was
to determine; but it was afterwards thought, that a bill for
enlarging the time of continuance of parliaments in general
would be lefs liable to exceptions. The next thing that fell
under confideration was, Whether this intended bill should
be fet on foot in the houfe of lords, or in the house of com-
nions? The firft was judged the properer for feveral rea-
fons, particularly, because, the court being more fure of a
majority in the house of commons, if the bill mifcarried
with the lords, the odium of this project, which carried a
face of unpopularity, would not reft upon the commons, nor
confequently prejudice future elections.

On the 9th of April in the evening, about thirty of the court lords met at the duke of Devonfhire's, where, after a short confultation, it was refolved to begin this matter the very next day; and the duke was defired to move it in the house of lords. The duke readily complied with the defire

of

of the affembly; and the next day, after the lords had dif- Geo. I. patched fome private bufinefs, the duke ftood up, and made 1716. a fpeech on the inconveniencies that attend triennial elec tions; fuggefting, in particular, that they keep up party divifions, raife and foment feuds and animofities in private families; occafion ruinous expences; and give occafion to the cabals and intrigues of foreign princes. It therefore be came the wisdom of that auguft affembly to apply a proper remedy to an evil, which might be attended with the most dangerous confequences, especially in the prefent temper of the nation. For, though the rebellion was happily fuppreffed, yet the fpirit of it remained unconquered, and feemed only to wait for an opportunity to fhew itfelf with more violence. That, the election of a new parliament, which by the triennial act was not far off, being the most favourable juncture, which the difaffected could expect, he thought it abfolutely neceffary to deprive them of it. For which purpofe he had a bill to offer to this houfe, for inlarging the continuance of parliaments;' and moved, that the fame might be read. The duke was feconded by the earl of Rockingham, and fupported by the duke of Argyle, the earl of Dorfet, the lord Townshend, and fome other lords. The duke of Bucks, the lord Trevor, the earls of Nottingham and Aylesford, and fome peers of the other fide, did not directly oppose the bill, but made long fpeeches for putting off the reading of it to another time. They owned, that every member has the privilege of offering what bill he thinks fit, without afking leave; but that the houfe is likewife at liberty either to read it or not, as they think convenient; and that the matter, now offered, was of fo high a nature, that it well deferved to be maturely weighed and confidered before the fame was debated: And therefore they moved, that the bill might lie for fome days on the table. To this it was anfwered, that nothing was farther from their thoughts, than to carry any thing by furprise: That, by the ordinary method of proceeding, every member has fufficient time to weigh and confider what is offered in the houfe; and, to fhew how fairly they intended to act in this affair, the earl of Dorfet propofed, that, after the bill had been once read, the fecond reading of it fhould be put off for fome days, and that all the members in and about London fhould be fummoned to attend. The lords of the oppofite fide, finding themselves the weaker, acquiefced in this motion; fo the bill was read the first time, and ordered to be read a fecond on the 14th of April.

it.

Geo. I. On that day the bill was read (a), and a warm debate 1716. arofe, which lafted five hours (b). The earl of Abingdon - faid, The bii! was of a very extraordinary nature, fince it Debate upon repealed the Triennial act, which the people justly looked Pr. H. L. upon as the great fecurity of their rights and liberties; and that, if it paffed this house, and the commons agreed to it, the fame would be a breach of that truft, which was repofed in them by those whom they reprefented.' The latter part of this affertion was denied by the duke of Kingston, who urged, That the business of the legislature was to rectify old laws, as well as to make new ones.' Earl Powlet declared, That he would be for it, if he thought it for the king's fervice and intereft; but that, before they went any farther in fo important an affair, fome method fhould be taken to know the fentiments of the nation.' He urged,

That this bill fhewed a diftruft of the affection of the Geo. I. people, without which no king can be either fafe or eafy. 1716. That king William gained the hearts of his fubjects by the Triennial Act; and it would look fomewhat ffrange, that the most popular of our laws fhould be repealed a year after the Proteftant fucceffion took place.' After this, he endeavoured to answer what was fuggefted in fupport of this bill, viz. 1. That frequent elections occafion ruinous expences. 2. That they raile a great ferment, and foment animofities, which are of the most dangerous confequence after the late rebellion: And 3. That they obftruct foreign alliances.' He faid, That no ftrefs ought to be laid on the firft of those objections, expences at elections being voluntary. That, às to the second, he was forry there had been a rebellion; but that the fame was now happily fuppreffed. And, as to the third fuggeftion, the fame was of no weight with him, it being his opinion, that in a matter, which so nearly concerns our conftitution, we ought to have regard to our felves only, and not to foreigners.' Upon all which confiderations, he was against the committing of this bill. The earl of Dorfet faid, among other things, That they who now spoke against this bill, would be for it, if it ferved their turn. That the Triennial act was a new law, and an alteration of the old conftitution. That, the experience of twenty years having fhewn a thousand inconveniencies attending that law, they ought to apply a remedy to it. That it fowed the feeds of corruption, it being notorious, that great numbers of perfons had no other livelihood, than by being employed in bribing corporations. That we had lately a fad experience of it; fince by those methods a parliament was procured by the laft miniftry, which gave fanction to moft of their ill meafures, and went near to give up the trade and liberties of the nation. That triennial elections deftroy all family intereft, and fubject our excellent conftitution to the caprice of the multitude: And, in fhort, that by triennial elections we have but a triennial government, which is little better than no government at all. For which reafons he was for the bill. The lord Trevor faid, That the question now lying before them was, Whether the law, they were going to make, tended to the good or prejudice of the conftitution? That, for his own part, he looked upon the Triennial Act as an effential part of our ancient conftitution, according to which, frequent, and even annual parliaments were to be held. That he might eafily prove, that long parliaments were always pernicious. That, when king

A 4

Geo. I. king Charles I. had given up his prerogative of diffolving par1716. liaments in 1640, he gave himself up into the hands of traytors, and had nothing but destruction to expect from them. That, after the restoration, king Charles II, that very good prince, found the inconvenience of a long parliament. That, as foon as the nation had opportunity, by the revolution, to affert their just rights and liberties, the Triennial Act was infifted on, and gained, at laft, with a great deal of oppofition. That there were very good and cogent reasons for making a law to fupport the conftitution, and prevent incroachments, either of parliaments on the crown, or of the crown on the rights and liberties of the people; and to correct abufes and exorbitances committed through the ambition. and avarice of minifters. That he would not be thought to reflect on the prefent administration; but that, in his opinion, frequent elections were a neceffary right of the subject to remedy abuses. That, for his own part, he had ever been against the bill for limiting the number of officers in the house of commons: But, if the Triennial Act were repealed, he thought that bill would become very neceffary, because the long fitting of parliaments would give the crown both an opportunity and temptation to multiply the number of officers. That fome reflections had been caft on the laft parliament But that, in his opinion, that parliament was chofen by the fame method as the prefent was, by great expences. That he owned this to be a great abufe; but that laws might be made to rectify the fame. That, if this bill paffed, how could any member of the other house expect to preferve his intereft with those who chofe him, when this bill would certainly be interpreted both a violation of their right, and a breach of the truft repofed in him? That, if this houfe of commons continued themfelves beyond the time, for which they were chofen, they were no more the reprefentatives of the people, but a houfe of their own making. That he was forry there were difcontents in the country; but he apprehended that this bill would rather increase than abate them. He owned, that the majority of this house of commons were honeft gentlemen, who had the intereft of their king and country at heart; but that, in his opinion, thofe, who went before them, did not come fhort of them in point of duty and affection to his majefty; for it was they who established the king on his throne, and fettled his revenue with all chearfulness imaginable. That what he had fuggefted, flowed from the dread of the ill confequences of this bill, which might rife to fuch an height, as to ren

der