It was followed by a protest of unusual length, and great energy, wherein it underwent a severe scrutiny. A minute investigation was made of every obnoxious part, and no censures were spared of which it was thought deserving. The protesting peers were Richmond, Ponsondy, Fitzwilliam, Abergavenny, Rockingham, Chedworth, Abingdon and Manchester. We dissent, say they, in one place, “Because we reject with indignation that clause of this bill, which by a refinement in tyranny, and in a sentence worse than death, obliges the unhappy men, who shall be made captives in this predatory war, to bear arms against their families, kindred, friends and country; and after being plundered themselves, to become accomplices in plundering their brethren.” His majesty went to the house of peers, (Dec. 21.) and gave his assent to the above bill; and to others at the same time. In the course of the debates upon the American business, the great importance of the colonies to the mother country was urged, by the ministry, as a reason for exerting the force of the nation in order to reduce them to obedience, though upon other occasions they had been spoken of as little consequence. That this reduction might be the sooner and more effectually secured, the states-general were solicited, by a letter of his majesty’s own hand-writing, to dispose of their Scotch brigade, to serve against the Americans the ensuing campaign. The request, however, was not granted. The opinion gave by _John Derk van der Chapelle_, in the assembly of the states of Overyssel, was pointedly against it. When entered upon his last observation, he says, “Though not as principals, yet as auxiliaries, our troops would be employed toward suppressing (that what some please to call) a rebellion in the American colonies; for which purpose I would rather see Janissaries hired, than troops of a free state.” “In what an odious light must this unnatural civil war appear to all Europe; a war in which even savages (if credit can be given to news-paper information) refuse to engage; more odious still would it appear for a people to take a part therein who were themselves once slaves, bore that hateful name, but at last had spirit to fight themselves free. But above all, it must appear superlatively detestable to me, who think the Americans worthy of every man’s esteem, and look on them as a brave people, defending in a becoming, manly and religious manner, those rights, which as men, they derive from God, not from the legislature of Great-Britain.” “Their mode of proceeding will, I hope, serve as an example to every nation deprived by any means of its privileges; yet fortunate enough in being able to make suitable efforts toward retaining or regaining them.”