cess of its measures did not correspond with the over sanguine expec. tations of the public, the people were industriously reminded, that the king, in trusting the goverament of the country to the bands where it was now lodged, had consulted less his own opinions and inclinations, than what he understood to be the wishes and expectations of his people. The new opposition professed those principles and followed that line of condeet, which they understood to be the most acceptable at court. They disclaimed with horror the intention of a systematic opposition to his majesty's government, and showed indeed by their conduct that nothing could possibly unite them in any system, except the being together in ofice; and yet in the midst of these professions, they contrived to harass the ministers as effectually as the most factious opposition could have done. It is immaterial, whether these symptoms of how the court stood affected towards the administration were rightly interpreted or t. The belief that ministers were acceptable in that quarter was equally prejudical to their interest in the country, as if the fact had been so; and the effect of it, on the whole, was to weaken the pubde confidence in the stability of their alministration, which every one concluded, whether rightly or not Bout of the question, would last no konger than the necessity that had imposed it. In addition to all these circumtances, the component parts of the v administration had been too recently brought together, when they first came into office, to be thoroughly united. Lord Sidmouth had been anconnected with the other leaders of the party at so late a period as the death of Mr. Pitt Had an amendment to the address been moved on the first day of the sessions, it was understood that lord Sidmouth and his friends would have supported the original address. The two other branches of the government, which had been known by the names of the new and old opposition, had begun to cooperate in parliament, and to concert together their proceedings in that assembly, in the spring of 1804, but without making any formal compact or agreement for a union of parties. In so much, that when Mr. Addington resigned in the beginning of the summer of that year, there existed no positive or formal en. gagements between Mr. Fox and lord Grenville, of a nature to have prevented the latter from accepting the offers of Mr. Pitt, and going into office without the other. The refusal of the noble lord to act in that manner arose from the operation of public principle alone, unfettered by any private compact or engagement. Since that period the greatest union and confidence had subsisted between the leaders of the two parties; but the same good understanding was not yet thoroughly established between their respective adherents. Many of the old oppo. sition trembled, lest the popular principles of their party should be diluted or neutralized by the influence of their new connections. The friends of Lord Grenville had not yet quite banished from their minds their former alarms of what they apprehended to be the revolu. tionary principles of some of their new associates; and from pri. vate intimacy and long habits of acting with the ex-ministers, they D 2 could could hardly bring themselves to Jook upon them or treat them as political opponents. Time could alone overcome these difficulties, and bring these two parties to act heartily in concert, and to consider their friends and interests as the same. Though there never was a junction of parties, which had been less the work of design and intrigue, and more the result of circumstances, and the natural course of things, than the coalition which had taken place between Mr. Fox and lord Grenville, it had produced, to a certain degree, the effect of all coalitions, on the adherents of both, by weakening and cooling their zeal and attachment to their party. It always happens, that the lower we descend in a party, the more of personal auimosity and raucour we find to prevail in it, and these passions are so intimately mixed and blended in the minds of the multitude with the principles of the party, that the one cannot easily be eradicated without weakening or even destroying the others. When the leaders of opposite parties coalesce, their adherents, who supposed them actuated with their own passions and resentments, are commonly surprised and offended by their reconciliation, and are apt without further examination to exclaim, that the principles for which they have contended are betrayed. It is not enough for them to be told, that the grounds of former disagreement have been changed or removed by time; that the points, on which their leaders formerly differed, and still possibly differ in opinion, have ceased to be subjects of discussion; that there exists between them, at present, no fundamental difference, on any practical question of importa that is likely to call for their cision; that new questions arisen, on which those who da from the government, must ei unite their efforts, or give up contest, and leave the interest their country to be disposed o the will of the court; and that -true point for consideration whether two parties should coale in order to increase their means ability of serving their country. should remain separate, beca they have formerly differed opinion, or, because there still some points on which t differ, of a speculative natu of subordinate importance, or, ci fessedly unattainable at the pres moment. That the coalition of parties le to mutual concessions and comp mise, cannot be denied ; 1 where is the party or association men, united for any common p pose, whether lawful or unlawf meritorious or blameable, where compromise of opinions is not nec sary for the existence and co tipuance of the party? Does any o imagine, that, because a body men act together on every occasio they also think alike without a shade or diference of opinion, every question that comes befo them? But, if there must be co promise of opinions in party t vindication of coalitions turns up the question, whether party is n the best, if not the only system f supporting the cause of liberty this country; and, however th question may be resolved, a par man cannot consistently find fa with the principle of coalition. vindicate party, and shew that it a necessary counterpoise in our g vernment, to the power and infuence of the crown, it is sufficient to remark that government with us is always a party, that every placeman either gives up his opinion to the government or resigns his ofice. But, if every placeman, whatever be his private opinions, votes upon every question, as if he had no opinion but that of the govern. ment, how can any opposition to the measures of government be effectual, or have even the remotest chance or slightest possibility of success, unless they who disapprove of the general conduct of the government, combine together on a similar principle, and while they agree on certain fundamental tenets, make mutual concessions of opinion en subordinate questions. If such a party is formed for the mere purpose of forcing itself into place, it degenerates into a miserable faction; bet, when founded on public principles, it has been found by experience, to be the safeguard and defence of our rights and liberties. While, however, we are of opision, that without party the power of the crown, which nominates directly or indirectly to all the offices of the government, would be abso. late and irresistible; and that the coalition of parties is to be justified on the same ground on which party itself is to be vindicated; we admit, that great caution and deliberation ought to be used, before resolving on any particular coalition. The leader of a party has no means of resisting the weighty arguments and substantial logic of the treasury, but through the opinion, which his friends and the country entertain of his virtues and integrity. He had better, therefore, remain in oppo sition, at the head of a small party devoted to his cause, than obtain a temporary victory over his opponents at the hazard of alienating and offending his friends, or of ap pearing to the country to have de serted the principles, which he has professed. It is at the same time true, that the public is often unreasonably fastidious with respect to coalitions of parties. From the severity of its judgments on that subject, men should seem to have forgotten, that there has been no strong or popular government in England since the revolution, in which individuals of the most oppo. site principles and most obnoxious characters have not been included. In so much, that we might be tempt ed to conclude from the frequency of coalitions among English parties, that it is to that cause, that party divisions are marked with less inveteracy in England, and attended with less danger to the public safety and tranquillity, than in any other free country with the history of which we are acquainted. These general remarks, into which we have been led on parties and coalitions, apply not, however, to the case before us. None of the inconveniences, to which we have alluded in the last paragraph, were to be apprehended in the first in stance from the coalition between Mr. Fox and lord Grenville; though a sagacious observer might have foreseen, that, if Mr. Fox delayed long the execution of his plans of reform, or failed in his negotiation for peace, many of his adherents would abandon his party, and set up a separate standard for themselves; and on the other hand, it might have been safely fore D 3 told, told, that if lord Grenville remain. ed faithful to his connection with Mr Fox, many of those persons, who professed the greatest regard and attachment to him at present, would desert him on the first i mation from the court, that th was any serious intention in t quarter of changing the adminis tion. CHA CHAP. III. Mätery System—Army of Reserve Bill-Additional Force Bill-Notice of a Motion for the Repeal of the Additional Force Bill-Petitions against it -Conversation in the House of Commons arising out of a Question put to Mr. Windham by Mr. Long-Conversation in a Committee of the House on the Army Estimates-Mr. Windham Refuses to fir a Day for bringing forward his Military Plans-Debate on the Ordnance Estimates-Debate on the Motion for Leave to bring in a Bill for the Repeal of the Additional Furce Bill-Debate on the Production of Military Opinions on Enlistment for a Term of Years—Additional Force Repeal Bill-Debate on the First Reading-On the Second Reading-On the Motion for going into a Committee in the Committee on the Third Reading-in the House of Lords on the Second Reading-Mutiny Bill-Debate in the House of Commons on the Clause introducing limited Service-On bringing up the Clause-On filling up the Blanks in the Clause-On the Third Reading of the Bill— Debate in the House of Lords on the Production of Military Opinions On the Clause of the Mutiny Bill introducing limited Service-On the Third Reading of the Mutiny Bill—Debates in the House of Commons on the Chelsea Hospital Bill-The training Bill-The Volunteer Officers' Bill -and Militia Officers' Bill-Increase of Pay to Infantry Officers, and to Officers and petty Officers of the Navy--Greenwich Hospital Bill-Foreign Troops Enlisment Bill. No subject had, of late years, so frequently engaged the attention of parliament, as to devise a mode of increasing and recruiting the army, effectual for the attainment of its object and suited to the circumstances of the country. Project after project had been proposed. Experiment after experiment had been tried. The coarsest instruments had been used till they were worn out, and the most complicated machinery had been resorted to, without success. Every possible variety of form had been given to our military D4 establishments, |