learned that though he and his heroic band had done their utmost, there was almost an equal deficiency of support and cooperation for its execution. The surrender at Yorktown was the concluding scene of offensive war with America. All the profuse expenditure of British wealth, all the mighty efforts of British power, all the splendid achievements of British valour, directed and guided by British talents and skill, proved without effect; the momentous exertions of a war so wasteful of blood and treasure were for ever lost. CHAP XXVII. 1781. CHAP. XXVIII. CHAP. XXVIII. Dissatisfaction again prevails in Britain-enhanced by the news from Virginia! *** DURING the recess of parliament 1781, dissatisfaction had begun again to prevail, from incidents and events already mentioned, and especially from repeated instances of alleged 1781. misconduct in the ministerial direction of the navy. That tion again source of dissatisfaction being opened, speedily caused others prevails in 10 issue: the immense expenditure, the profuse loans, the enor Britain; Dissatisfac XXVIII. 1781. mous increase of taxes, the little avail of all our exertions, pre- CHAP sented themselves to the view, and the public were very differently disposed towards ministers, on the approach of the second session of parliament, from what they had been at the beginning of the first. Both dejected and dissatisfied, their enhanced gloom and displeasure were dreadfully aggravated by the me- by the news from Virgi lancholy news from Virginia. Judging of ministry under the nia. immediate impression of this calamitous event, they hastily imputed our misfortunes to a series of folly, obstinacy, and misconduct. Many who had strenuously recommended perseverance in coercion, now reprobated that system which they had most loudly applauded: a majority out of parliament became inimi- out of parcal to the American war and the present ministers; such was liament bethe disposition becoming prevalent, when parliament met on comes hosthe 27th of November. tile to mi nisters. His majesty's speech somewhat exceeding the usual length Meeting of în copiousness of detail, imputed the continuance of the war to parliament, the restless ambition of his enemies. He should not discharge and the king's the trust committed to the sovereign of a free people, or requite speech. the constant and zealous attachment of his subjects to his person, family, and government, if to his own desire of peace, or to their temporary ease and relief, he sacrificed their essential rights and permanent interests. Having mentioned the favourable affairs in the East Indies, he recommended farther inquiries into the condition of the dominions and revenues of that country. His majesty stated to the house without palliation or diminution, the unfortunate event of the campaign in Virginia, but adduced it as a ground for a firm confidence in parliament, and more vigorous, animated, and united exertions. The consequent address excited a very interesting debate, in Opposition which opposition sketched the principal topics of the charges winwhich they adduced against ministers in the course of the ses- creased ension, and of the counsels which they proposed to be substituted. ergy against Their arguments were directed to prove the original folly of" the American war; the madness of perseverance iu so hopeless a contest; the incapacity, negligence, and mismanagement of the first lord of the admiralty; the ignorance, weakness, and incompetence of administration in their various departments, as well as general system; and the necessity of changing both men' and measures. Lord North defended himself and his colleagues, Dexterous both as to particular counsels and the series of policy, with a defence of dexterity and ingenuity that, if it did not convince impartial readers or hearers, at least impressed them with a high opinion of the speaker's ability. with ministers. lord North. On the 4th of December, Mr. Burke proposed an inquiry into `** the conduct of the captors of St. Eustatius; a confiscation of effects, he alleged, there took place contrary to national justice and to national policy. To prove his first head, he entered into a very learned and able discussion of the extent of powers acquired by conquerors over an enemy surrendering XXVUL 1781. CHAP at discretion; and for this purpose quoted the authority of the most celebrated writers on the law of nations, traced the history of these laws, and their actual, state, as elucidated by the concurrent practice of all civilized societies. The feelings of mankind had even exceeded the theories of jurisprudence in mitigating the calamities of war; hence he inferred the necessity, in the present improved state of that code, of interpreting the maxims of law, even in the most mild and favourable sense. He therefore contended, that from the moment of submission, the vanquished parties were entitled to the security of subjects. Having laid down this proposition, he proceeded to a detail of the alleged enormities which he contended to be contrary to every dictate of justice and humanity, and offered to prove his allegations by testimony. Such cruelty and depredation by exciting the hatred and enmity of neutral states, were no less impolitic than unjust. Admiral Rodney, without controverting Mr. Burke's general principle, totally denied his statement of the case; the Dutch were at war with us, therefore it was per fectly fair, and consistent with the law of nations that their property captured without a capitulation should be confiscated = he had seized the whole, not for himself and the other captors, but for the crown: he could have no mercenary views, as he did not till long after receive intelligence of the king's intention to bestow the booty on the fleet and army. He knew of no outrage, and never had heard that any was committed by the con querors. The charge being unsupported by facts and docuPrelimina- ments, Mr. Burke's motion was negatived. On the 12th of De ry motions cember, the day appointed for considering the army supplies, a against motion was brought forward by sir James Lowther concerning ministers, before the the American war, apparently intended to sound the dispositions of the house, and preparatory to more pointed propositions. It was proposed to declare, that the war in North America had been hitherto ineffectual to the purposes for which it was undertaken; and that perseverance in it would be unavailing, and also injurious to the country, by weakening her power to resist her ancient and confederated enemies. On this subject, so of ten discussed in such a variety of forms, there could be little novelty of argument. But opposition, in the division, ascer tained the point which they were most anxious to establish the minority, amounting to one hundred and seventy-nine to two hundred and twenty, showed that ministers were losing Difference ground. In the course of the discussions which American of opinion affairs underwent before the recess, the difference between lord among op- Shelburne's connexions and the Rockingham party, concerning position on American the independence, became more manifest than on any former. independ- occasion. Great contests also prevailed in the cabinet, respect ing the plan of policy to be adopted in the present emergency. Some of the ministers proposed the total evacuation of America, and the direction of our whole force against the house of Bour bon; but the majority still cast a longing lingering look after recess. ence. XXVIII. the object which they had pursued for so many years. The CHAP most sanguine saw now, that all hopes of reducing the whole of the colonies were for ever vanished, but they still fondly fancied that they might preserve a part; and it was therefore de termined, that a considerable force should be left at New-York. 1781 During the recess the opponents of ministry were employed Plan of in forming and maturing a plan of general attack against ad-tack against ministration. The chief conduct was intrusted to Mr. Fox administra and the various parts assigned to other senators, were to be distion. rected and supported by this illustrious leader, so admirably fit ted for the warfare which he now undertook. Indeed, though it would be difficult to determine in what mode such transcendent powers COULD be most effectually exerted; it is certain, as an historical fact, that the force and splendour of Mr. Fox's genius have been most frequently displayed, not in legislative invention or plans of executory policy, but in reprehensive eloquence; not in devising systems and measures for the wise and beneficial government of the country; but in contending that others have planned and acted unwisely and injuriously. On the 23d of January, the day after the Christmas adjournment expired, Mr. Fox moved an inquiry into the causes of the want of success of his majesty's naval forces during the war, and more particularly in the year 1781. For this purpose, he proposed a committee; which being agreed to by ministers, he, a fortnight after, on the 7th of February, discussed the subject. He traced the naval history from the beginning of the war, and exhibited a summary of the alleged miscarriages of the successive years. In surveying the events of 1780, he, with peculiar energy, exposed the infatuation which sent captain Moutray, with the East and West India fleets, so near the enemy's coasts. Hav ing reached 1781, he stated five distinct charges of misconduct in the naval department: 1st, De Grasse was suffered to depart for the West Indies, without any effort to intercept his fleet. He had sailed from Brest on the 22d of March, with twenty-five ships of the line; Darby was at sea on the 13th, but instead of being suffered to pursue the enemy, he had been sent out of the way to Ireland. The second charge was, the loss of the St. Eustatius convoy, which had been captured on its way home; this might have been easily saved by sending a squadron at the time they were expected. The third was a letter sent by the mayor of Bristol from the admiralty, in answer to one from that gentleman, requesting information concerning the combined fleet; the admiralty had misinformed and misled the Bristol merchants, by intimating that the hostile armament was not in the channel, when they knew that it was' there, and had thereby endangered the trading ships of that city. The fourth charge was on the force sent to cope with the Dutch; and the fifth, the inadequate fleet sent out with admiral Kempenfeldt. The general defence adduced by lord Mulgrave, in favour of earl: Sandwich, was, that he had acted according |