Contract of Alderman Baker for Victualling the Troops--Parliamentary Inquiries limited to Minorca--Byng’s Sentence produces various impressions--It is referred to the Judges--Conduct of the Judges on the Case referred to them--Conduct of Fox--The Admiralty signs the Sentence--The Sentence notified to the House of Commons--Mr. Pitt demands Money for Hanover--Lord George Sackville declares for Pitt--His Motives for so doing--Approaching Execution of Byng--Debate in the House of Commons on his Sentence--Members of the Court-Martial desirous to be absolved from their Oaths--The Author urges Keppel to apply to the House of Commons--Sir Francis Dashwood applies for Keppel--The King’s Message--Court-Martial Bill passes the House. Feb. 7th.--The younger of the brothers carried the war into another quarter, attacking Alderman Baker on a contract he had obtained from the Government for victualling the troops in North America; and falling severely on his uncle Newcastle, whom he abused, with more outrage than wit, in a very florid strain of satiric irony. Fox defended Baker; Nugent, his patron: Baker on a subsequent day vindicated himself, and cleared the fairness of his contract. George Townshend and the Tories were displeased with these hostilities to Newcastle, who they feared would be driven to unite with Fox, with whom the Duke consulted for the defence of Baker. His Grace and Fox being already complicated in the late measures, a new accession of common interest might renew their league. These apprehensions operated so strongly on Fox’s enemies, that great coldness was shown on the matter of inquiries; and when George Townshend could no longer in decency defer to call for papers previous to the examination, as he did at last, February 8th, the inquisition seemed affectedly limited to the loss of Minorca, on which subject, Newcastle and Fox had had leisure for months to remove from all offices whatever papers could be supposed to affect them. All discussion of the neglects in America, so extensive, so numerous, and so easily to be proved, were cautiously avoided. Indication sufficient, that the late Ministers had left no evidence against themselves, was, that in a Parliament constituted almost entirely of their friends, not a single objection was made by any of their dependents against the scrutiny into their conduct. The most upright Ministers had never met popular attacks with indifference--were Newcastle, Anson, Fox, more bold, or more innocent, than any of their predecessors? The farce of national justice had never appeared in more glaring colours: Mr. Byng had been kept a close prisoner from the instant of his arrest; thirty witnesses that he had demanded had been denied to him; every evidence that could possibly affect him had been produced--when the more powerful criminals were to be charged, a single part of their administration was selected, papers were demanded by guess, and it