The Works of Samuel Johnson, LL.D. Volume 10: Parlimentary Debates IJohnson, Samuel
History
The Works of Samuel Johnson, LL.D. Volume 10: Parlimentary Debates I
Johnson, Samuel
Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons -- History -- 18th century
Lord CHOLMONDELEY said:--My lords, I do not presume to dispute any
assertion of the noble duke, for whose knowledge I have the highest
veneration, but only to offer such hints for inquiry as may be pursued
by other lords of greater abilities, and to show, that as some
difficulties may be raised, the resolution ought not to be agreed to
without farther deliberation; since it not only tends to prescribe the
measures which shall be hereafter taken, and prohibit a method of
raising forces, which, when diligently examined, may, perhaps, appear
most eligible, but to censure the methods, which, when they were put in
practice the last year, received the approbation of all the powers of
the legislature.
Lord WESTMORELAND spoke next, as follows:--My lords, I have, for my own
satisfaction, stated the difference of the expense between the two
methods of raising forces, and find it so great, that the method
proposed by the noble duke ought, undoubtedly, to be preferred, even
though it were attended with some inconvenience, from which he has shown
it to be free.
Frugality, my lords, is one of the chief virtues of an administration; a
virtue without which no government can be long supported: the publick
expense can never be too accurately computed, or the first tendency to
profusion too rigorously opposed; for as in private life, so in
political economy, the demands of necessity are easily supplied; but if
once the calls of wantonness and caprice are complied with, no limits
can be fixed, nor will any treasure be sufficient.
Whether the burdens under which the people are now toiling were all
imposed by necessity, I will not inquire, but I think, my lords, we may
readily determine, that whatever is not necessary is cruel and
oppressive, and that, therefore, since the expense of raising new
regiments appears, at least, not to be necessary, it ought to be
opposed; and how can it be opposed more properly or effectually than by
the noble duke's resolution?
Lord HERVEY spoke to this effect:--My lords, I do not claim any
superiority of knowledge in any affairs that relate to the publick, but
have less acquaintance with the military establishment than with any
other part of the government, and can, therefore, neither oppose the
resolution now offered to your lordships by such arguments as may
deserve your attention, nor agree to it with that degree of conviction
which the importance of it seems to require.
That the chief argument which has been produced against raising new
regiments, is less formidable than it has been represented, will, I
believe, appear to your lordships, when it is considered that the
officers are always gentlemen of the first families in the empire, who,
therefore, cannot be supposed voluntarily to give up their relations and
posterity to the power of any ministry, or, for the sake of their
commissions, to betray that constitution by which their own properties
are secured.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account