and his people; but on the contrary, how dangerous to bring in arbitrary power and popery, I leave to every man's judgment; they were so far from being the true representatives of the people, that they were a distinct middle interest between the king and the people, and their chief business was to serve the end of some great minister of state, though never so opposite to the true interest of the nation. Sir, this business ought never to fall, though there should be never so many prorogations and dissolutions of parliaments, before any thing be done in it. I think it is the interest of the nation, that it should be prosecuted from parliament to parliament, as if there were an impeachment against them; and therefore, sir, I would humbly move you to send some members of this house to judge Gregory, for the papers he hath taken in his custody relating to this affair, that so you may, in convenient time, proceed further herein, as you shall think good: and, sir, hearing there is a report that some of this house have now made a bargain at court for great offices, in order to vitiate and corrupt their votes in this house; which, though but a project to cast a reflection on such members, however, to satisfy the world, I pray, sir, let there be a vote passed, that no member of this house shall accept of any office under the crown, during such time as he continues a member of this house.

SPEECH OF THE EARL OF STRAFFORD, ON THE MUTINY BILL. 1731.

MY LORDS,

It is certainly very necessary for us upon occasion of this bill to take the army under our consideration, and to determine what number of troops ought to be kept up; because, my lords, this is the only opportunity we can have of reducing the number allowed of, in case we happen to think it too great; and in case this bill goes the length of a committee, I shall then take the liberty to declare my sentiments upon that head. But, my lords, I now rise up to declare, that I am entirely against this bill, or any mutiny bill; because I always looked upon it as setting up a constitution within a constitution; or rather, indeed, it is the turning of our civil government into a military government. This, it is true, my lords, we may do by a law, and that law, when passed, will be a part of our constitution; yet I hope it will not be said, that such an extraordinary law would make no alteration in our constitution. I cannot be of -opinion, that the keeping up of any regular troops in this kingdom is absolutely necessary; but granting that it were, I am certain, that in order to keep such troops under proper discipline, it is not absolutely necessary to have a law against mutiny and desertion. I had, my lords, the honour to command a regiment of dragoons in the reign of king William, which was given to me at the time of the siege of Namur; and I very well remember, that there was not at that time in England any such law, as what is now by this bill to be

enacted. We had then no such thing as mutiny bills yearly brought in, nor any such bill passed into a law, and yet in those days, we found means to keep our regiments in good order enough; and I believe there was as exact discipline observed in the regiments then quartered in England, as has been observed at any time since. If any of the soldiers committed any crime, they were sure to be punished; but then they were punished according to the ancient laws of the kingdom. The officers took care to deliver them up to the civil power, and to see them convicted and punished as severely as the laws of their country would admit of; which we always found was sufficient for keeping the men in good order, and for making them observe the most exact discipline.

If I were to enter into a particular examination of this bill, I could make strong objections against several clauses thereof; I shall only mention that of desertion: how unnecessary, how cruel is it, now in time of peace, to punish that crime with death! In the time of war, such a severe punishment was necessary; it was then just to punish it with death, because the deserters were generally at the same time guilty of the most heinous treachery; they generally ran in to the enemy, and turned those arms against their country, which their country had put into their hands for its defence. But now, in time of peace, desertion has nothing in it of such a heinous nature; if a poor fellow deserts, he runs but from one of our own regiments to another; and the cruel treatment he meets with from some of the officers, may often afford him an excuse, if his case be examin

ed by men of humanity and candour. How many poor country-fellows, either out of a frolic, or because they have been disobliged or slighted by their mistress, go and list themselves for soldiers ! When such a fellow begins to cool, he perhaps repents of what he has done, and deserts without any other view or design but that of returning home, and following some industrious and laborious way of living in his own country. Is it not hard, that such a poor fellow should be shot for such a trifling crime? The law perhaps may not be executed with rigour; that, my lords, may be an excuse for the judge, but none for the lawgiver; considering that the officers are the sufferers by desertion, and also the judges in all trials of that crime, I think, my lords, that their not executing the law with rigour, is a convincing argument, that the pains are too severe; but, my lords, as I am against the bill itself, as well as every clause thereof, I am therefore against giving it a second reading, or entering into the consideration of the several clauses of it.

SPEECH OF MR. PULTENEY, ON THE MOTION FOR REDUCING THE ARMY. 1731.

WE have heard a great deal about parliamentary armies, and about an army continued from year to year. I have always been, sir, and shall be, against a standing army of any kind. To me it is a terrible thing, whether under that of parliament, or any other designation; a standing army is still a standing army, whatever name it be called by;

they are a body of men distinct from the body of the people; they are governed by different laws : blind obedience, and an entire submission to the orders of their commanding officer, is their only principle. The nations around us are already enslaved, and have been enslaved by those very means by means of their standing armies, they have every one lost their liberties. It is, indeed, impossible that the liberties of the people can be preserved in any country where a numerous standing army is kept up. Shall we then take any of our measures from the examples of our neighbours? No, sir; on the contrary, from their misfortunes we ought to learn to avoid those rocks upon which they have split.

It signifies nothing to tell me, that our army is commanded by such gentlemen as cannot be supposed to join in any measures for enslaving their country; it may be so, I hope it is so; I have a very good opinion of many gentlemen now in the army; I believe they would not join in any such measures; but their lives are uncertain, nor can we be sure how long they may be continued in command; that they may not be all dismissed in a moment, and proper tools of power put in their room. Besides, sir, we know the passions of men; we know how dangerous it is to trust the best of men with too much power. Where was there a braver army than that under Julius Cæsar? where was there ever an army that had served their country more faithfully? That army was commanded generally by the best citizens of Rome; by men of great fortune and figure in their country; yet that army enslaved their country; the affections of the