Some passages of his speech I shall mention, though, for the reasons I have hinted at, and for that I sat at a great distance, I could but very imperfectly collect what he said. He allowed the prerogative of the Crown in making peace or war, though something he saw squint at what would subvert the liberties of this country; and, although such prerogative there was, still was it gracious to lay the Treaty before Parliament. The Crown might finally sign the Treaty; but at the same time it was a fundamental right of the House of Commons to offer their opinion. If this was not the question confessed, he would stop the debate to insert in these words, _as it is also the indubitable and fundamental right of Parliament to offer advice_. From this he launched out on _this venerable, this lovely Constitution_, and referred to the journals to show what answers were made by Parliament to James the First and Charles the Second; particularly to the unkingly and unconstitutional messages of the former, as when he bade them not meddle beyond their province, with a _ne sutor ultra crepidam_. He hoped we had no new cobbler of this old Constitution, and (looking at Fox) if we had, that man should not stand unaccused, unarraigned. With regard to the peace, it could not be called a question of humanity, for one campaign more might have prevented seven hereafter. In all other wars our commerce had been interrupted; in this alone, increased; and in respect of commerce, four of the best provinces in old France were not worth the acquisitions we had made. Those France might have reconquered; Guadaloupe she could not retake. We had got possession of their four trades of the world. Thanks to God, General Amherst had recovered Newfoundland! Thanks to Providence, Amherst’s brother had behaved like _his_ brother! Thus had we secured two of those trades, the fisheries and the sugar, all but at St. Domingo, and that we must have taken the next campaign. Our conquests in Africa gave us the Slave Trade; and those in India the exclusive trade of the Indies. _These depended no longer on the chance of war!_ He believed there was no disunion between France and Spain; this treaty would manifestly increase their weight: the Havannah would add to it--the Havannah! that would have enabled you to supply Spanish America with British manufactures and implements! He then pronounced the preliminaries _inadmissible_; declared he had thought it right to make peace when Mr. Stanley went to France, and had been for the King not abusing his prosperity. But he had _proved_ that France was not in earnest _then_; had only meant to cajole us, and deserved no management from us, after forcing us to the expense of this war, particularly by her iniquitous behaviour in the two Courts of Madrid and Naples, a conduct never paralleled in the unbridled behaviour of Louis the Fourteenth. Yet why talk of Naples, which was Bourbon weakness coupled with Bourbon