estimable prejudices of the nation. It was represented as novel in its principle, as unconstitutional in its tendency, by laying a foundation for the increase of the standing army, and as calculated to divert into either a useless or a dangerous channel those resources which ought rather to be applied to that great foundation of our strength, of our glory, and of our characteristic superiority over the rest of the nations of Europe - our navy. Those were in themselves substantial objections, and such as, if they did really apply to the case, ought to carry with them an insuperable authority: but he was come down prepared with such arguments as he flattered himself would appear to the House sufficient to answer, and even overturn them all; and in order that the whole scope and object of his reasoning might be the more readily and clearly understood, he would state, at the outset, the nature of his proposition, which he had so worded as to comprehend the whole of the several principles on which, in his mind, the question was to stand. He had, on a former day, suggested, that the most regular mode for debating the subject would arise in the committee of supply, when the question would be, whether to vote the whole of the annual ordnance estimates, which would amount to about 300,000l. or to vote only 250,000l. and by such means prevent the application of the 50,000l. voted in a former session for the purpose of fortifications, from the object for which it had been intended, by obliging the board of ordnance to apply it to the current service of the year: and, by so doing, to put an effectual stop to the whole system. From many things, however, which had fallen from gentlemen on the other side of the House, he was induced to wish, that a different method of arguing the question should be adopted; and he accordingly devised the present mode as best calculated, in his opinion, to afford an opportunity of discussing, in their fullest extent, every principle which could possibly be involved in the proceeding, as well those in opposition to it, as those in its favour. It was also more consistent with the great importance of the subject to bring it immediately before the House, in the form of a specific resolution, recognizing a great and momentous

principle, and founding on that principle an instruction to the committee, than to send it to the committee at once, as it were incidentally and collaterally. The resolution which he proposed, before he sat down, to move to the House was,

"That it appears to this House, that to provide effectually for securing His Majesty's dock-yards at Portsmouth and Plymouth, by a permanent system of fortification, founded on the most economical principles, and requiring the smallest number of troops possible to answer the purpose of such security, is an essential object for the safety of the state, intimately connected with the general defence of the kingdom, and necessary for enabling the fleet to act with full vigour and effect for the protection of commerce, the support of our distant possessions, and the prosecution of offensive operations in any war in which the nation may hereafter be engaged,"

He felt it impossible to contemplate this important question without regarding it as a portion of that momentary system which challenged, from its nature, the utmost care of all administrations whatsoever; a system, upon which rested the security and the glory of the national defence. And, in order to judge of its necessity towards that great object, he should attempt, but with much pain, to bring back the recollection of the House to the unfortunate and calamitous situation to which we were exposed in the late war, much in consequence of our want of those fortifications which it was the aim of the present question to provide. A considerable part of our fleet was confined to our ports, in order to protect our dock-yards; and thus we were obliged to do what Great Britain had never done before— to carry on a mere defensive war; a war in which, as in every other war merely defensive, we were under the necessity of wasting our resources, and impairing our strength, without any prospect of benefiting ourselves but at the loss of a great and valuable part of our possessions, and which at last was terminated by a necessary peace. Shame and affliction were brought upon us by the American war. Was the House ready to stand responsible to posterity for a repetition of such disgraces and

misfortunes? Were they willing to take upon themselves the hazard of transmitting to the next generation those dangers and those consequent calamities, which they had themselves so bitterly experienced? The subject of fortifications was not now for the first time to be discussed; it had been before the House during the course of the last session, and from what passed then, together with what had been done in consequence, he thought there was very little room, compatible with consistency of conduct, for that opposition which he apprehended was intended to be given to the present measure. The House, in the last session, had seemed well aware, that such an inquiry as was necessary towards forming a proper judgment on the subject, was by no means a proper one for it to go into. It had been, on all hands, agreed, that it was, in a great measure, a question of confidence, and they had, therefore, acquiesced in his proposal of sending it to the arbitration of a board of land and sea officers, to be constituted for that express purpose. That board had, of course, been appointed, and consisted of every thing that was great and respectable in the two professions; they had given the subject a higher degree of consideration and research than had ever been known on such an occasion in any other age or country. The report made by that board was in itself so direct, and so conclusive, as to the necessity of the measure, that it ought in itself completely to determine the question, should it even appear that the reasons of a collateral nature, advanced in opposition to it, were entitled to the authority which some persons seemed inclined to give them.

Concerning the questions, "whether the dock-yards could properly and effectually be defended by a naval force alone; by a military force alone; or by a naval and military force combined? or whether it was necessary that fortifications should be erected for their defence? and if so, what sort of fortifications were likely to be most effectual?" the board had answered, that neither a naval nor a military force, nor even both united, could afford a sufficient security for the nation to rely upon; but that

modes of fortification, the mode suggested by the master-general of the ordnance* was the most eligible, as being the most adequate to the defence proposed, capable of being manned by the smallest force, requiring the least expense to erect and particularly, as affording an increasing degree of security as they were erected; insomuch as, that, if any given portion of them were completed, and the remainder unfinished, yet even that part so completed would afford a great deal of strength. Such were the characters and abilities of the officers who composed that board, that it would naturally follow as the highest degree of inconsistency, were the House, after having referred the various branches of the detail of the inquiry to the board of officers, to re-assume that duty which they had already declined, as being out of their reach, and attempt to revise and correct the report of the board. All that the House ought to attend to was the general result of the report of that board; for it was itself incapable of investigating the subject minutely, and by detail, much less was it capable of correcting or deciding on the report of the officers. In order to diminish the credit of the report, (for the credit of the persons who framed it could not be impeached,) attempts were made to prove, that the instructions given to the board of general officers were such as confined them to the necessity of coming to one certain result, by means of data proposed for their consideration, which were all merely hypothetical, and afforded no latitude to them for the exercise of their own judgment. But how was it possible this could have been the case, when to the two first data the whole board were unanimous in giving their opinions? and their opinions on those data were entirely conclusive on the whole of the subject, for they went (and that unanimously) to establish the necessity of fortifications. Was it credible that a board, consisting of such men, could possibly be duped by chimerical and absurd hypotheses, so absurd and so extravagant, that he recollected the honourable general † had stated them as tantamount to a convulsion of nature? Was it to be supposed that they could be so * The Duke of Richmond. + General Burgoyne.

easily misled, and drawn unanimously into an opinion on a subject of such magnitude, and contrary to their own conviction? But, in fact, it was impossible to impute any such delusion in the present instance, for the answer to the first datum was absolutely unqualified and positive, and recognized the necessity of fortifying the dock-yards; the second enforced the same necessity, it is true, with a proviso;-but of what? the expense of their erection, and our ability to furnish a force to man them. It was not fair to argue that the whole result of the report was founded upon data in themselves improbable and ill-grounded, when, in truth, the principal data by which the several parts of the report had weight, were not the original data referred to the board, but such as they thought necessary to substitute and adopt, as a foundation for their ultimate opinions. This idea was in itself so absurd, that from the very words in which it had been expressed, and which he had before repeated, it appeared as if the gentlemen who had used them were in collusion with the House, and endeavouring to put their own opposition into the most ridiculous point of view. He should think it an insult to the officers concerned in the report, if he thought of saying any thing more in answer to a suggestion so much to their dishonour, as that they had been so egregiously and so palpably duped by an article so shallow, and of course so easily detected.

Some reliance had been placed, in former conversations, upon the dissent of certain members of the board, with respect to their opinion, touching particular parts of the subject. The instances of dissent, however, were not many, and they were such as he flattered himself could not stand as an insuperable objection to the general result. He felt himself rather in a disagreeable situation, at being obliged, in arguing the subject before the House, to attack the opinion and authority of any individual member of the board; but with respect to one of the two very respectable land officers, who had in any instance dissented