Beckford was answered by Cust[130] (the Speaker’s brother), and by Harvey;[131] the last, a lawyer; both of Tory families, and the latter very sensible. The former spoke on the burthen of the war, and said, that to raise six millions, we ran in debt two: this year would cost us between nine and ten. He would appeal to our very successes for the impropriety of continuing the war. The King had told us he would never depart from our true interest: if we never _had_ departed from it, we should not be debating now. Harvey condemned the war in Germany, and justified the intentions of Spain. Fuentes had declared, that if his Court had had any hostile designs, it would itself have made the demands; but the other end of the town, said he, will always promote a Spanish war: had done so in the last reign; had driven it on by the feigned cruelties exercised on Captain Jenkins,[132] who, however, died with his ears on his head. Forester, another and still shrewder lawyer, endeavoured to ward off the rising spirit by showing there was no such question before the House as what was then in debate, Wilkes not having made any motion; (this was an usual art in old members, and often served the purpose;) nor was the militia more the subject of the debate, nor as yet to come on. Thus was the House free from any influence but of gratitude to the militia, as they had been encamped without law, and only because we had a greater war abroad than we could bear. He hoped that night’s mail would not carry to the Continent news of disunion in the new Parliament.