446 1780 ENQUIRY INTO THE PENSION LIST. Ch. 24. county of York, and one of the most considerable persons in the House of Commons. He moved for a return of all pensions granted by the Crown during pleasure or otherwise, with the amount of such pensions respectively, the dates of such pensions, and the names of the pensioners. This motion was met by an amendment, limiting the information to the gross amount of the pension list. Lord North urged, in support of his amendment, the inhumanity of exposing to public animadversion the necessities of ancient and noble families, and the circumstances under which such pensions had been granted, to the unfair and ungenerous criticism of party pamphleteers. But the answer to all such objections is conclusive. The country provides no fund for relieving the necessities of a selected class. A just Pension List is not a dispensation of public bounty, but a recognition of past services; and, so far from being painful or humiliating, it should be a source of pride and satisfaction to any man to have his name inscribed on such a list. But the receipt of a pecuniary benefaction, whether from public or private sources, to which the recipient can prefer no just or honourable claim is, and ought to be, painful and degrading. The amendment of Lord North, after a debate more than usually animated and acrimonious, was carried only by a majority of two in a full house. Virulent debates. The debates of the session were conducted with more than usual personality and asperity. POLITICAL DUELS. The leaders of the Opposition in either House were engaged in duels, in consequence of the violence of their language. Lord Shelburne, in censuring the appointment of a Mr. Fullarton, a member of the House of Commons, to the rank of lieutenant-colonel, spoke of him as a clerk, who had no pretensions to any military rank whatever. The fact was, that Fullarton, following the example of other gentlemen, had raised a regiment when the war with France was declared; and for that act of public spirit, had been gratified by a commission as lieutenantcolonel. There was nothing in this transaction either as regarded Government, or Mr. Fullarton, which called for censure; but Lord Shelburne, instead of giving Fullarton an appropriate reparation in the form of an apology, which the more just notions of honour prevalent in these days would have demanded, thought fit to risk his life in a quarrel which he had so wantonly provoked. He was dangerously wounded in a duel by the person whom he had insulted; and such was the violence of party spirit, that he received many congratulatory addresses from public bodies, some of which did not scruple to insinuate, that the challenge of Colonel Fullarton was prompted by the murderous animosity of the Government. Another duel took place between Mr. Fox and Mr. Adams, in consequence of some violent personality uttered by the former in the House of Commons. In this case also the aggressor was 447 Ch. 24. 1780 448 THE SPEAKER NORTON. Upon Ch. 24. wounded, but Fox, with the candour and generosity which belonged to him, after receiving 1780 his adversary's fire, disclaimed any intention of giving personal offence. About the same time the House of Commons was edified by a quarrel, which from the graver character and position of the principals, could not be settled by an appeal to arms. The Speaker, Norton, in pursuance of previous concert with Fox, took occasion of the House being in Committee, to make an attack upon Lord North, whose enmity he complained of having provoked in consequence of his patriotic conduct in the affair of the Civil List. further explanation, however, it appeared that the Speaker's real grievance was, that the Attorney-General was about to be preferred to the chief seat in the Court of Common Pleas, to which Norton asserted that he had a prior claim, in pursuance of a previous compact. Lord North denied the existence of any such compact as far as he was concerned, and declined to be bound by any compact or understanding between the Speaker and a former Minister. The AttorneyGeneral commented with malignant sarcasm on the sordid indecency of Norton's conduct: and, in a spirit kindred to that which he censured, proceeded to vindicate his own pretensions, in comparison with those of the Speaker, to the high judicial of fice, which was at this moment efficiently filled, and was to be vacated only for the purpose of providing for a political partizan. This scandalous discussion PETITIONS FOR REFORM. took place in a debate upon one of the most important provisions of Burke's Establishment Bill, the abolition, namely, of the Board of Trade, which, as then constituted, was merely a pretext for eight Treasury votes in the House of Commons. 449 Ch. 24. 1780 of petitions Meanwhile, the petitions for parliamentary and Accumulation economical reform were accumulating upon the for Reform. table of the House; and represented in the whole, as was stated by Mr. Dunning, the sentiments of more than one hundred thousand electors. If this calculation was correct, so large a proportion of the constituency has never yet to my knowledge united in recommending any other measure to the consideration of Parliament. It seemed that the great mass of the wealth, intelligence, and even of the population of the country, were at length united against the corruption of Parliament, and the Crown upon the principles of the Revolution. Accordingly, it was with the highest expectation that the House of Commons was called upon to express its sense of the public opinion thus emphatically signified. The sixth of April was the day fixed for the consideration of the petitions. A call of the House was ordered; a great meeting of the Westminster Reformers was convened by the Whig leaders; and the Government, on their part, thought fit to station a 450 MOTION FOR INQUIRY INTO THE CIVIL LIST Ch. 24. military force in the neighbourhood of Westminster Hall. 1780 Dunning's proposal to reduce the power of the Crown. It was proposed that the House should resolve, 'that the influence of the Crown had increased, was increasing, and ought to be diminished.' And these momentous words were offered to the House by Dunning, one of the greatest lawyers that ever sat in Parliament, and one of the very few statesmen, whom the profession of the law, in this country, has produced. The motion was introduced with a moderation of language which became the high authority of the speaker. He said that his resolution was in accordance with the general tenor of the petitions on the table, though not in accordance with the terms of either of them; and he established the truth of his proposition by referring to common notoriety, as well as to particular cases, which he quoted with the precision and aptitude of a skilful advocate. The ministers made but a feeble resistance to the most formidable motion which had been made since the Long Parliament; and it was affirmed in a House of four hundred and forty-eight members by a majority of eighteen. Another resolution was immediately proposed by Dunning, that it was competent to the House, whenever they thought proper, to examine into and correct abuses in the expenditure of the Civil List revenues.' This resolution was proposed in consequence of a question having been raised as to the right of |