VIOLENT CONTEST CONCERNING THE SEAMEN’S BILL.

But the most violent contest arose on certain regulations which the ministry wanted to establish in two bills, relating to the sea and land service. The first, under the title of a bill for amending, explaining, and reducing into one act of parliament the laws relating to the navy, was calculated solely with a view of subjecting half-pay officers to martial law—a design which not only furnished the opposition with a plausible handle for accusing the ministers as intending to encroach upon the constitution, in order to extend the influence of the crown; but also alarmed the sea-officers to such a degree, that they assembled to a considerable number, with a view to deliberate upon the proper means of defending their privileges and liberties from invasion. The result of their consultations was a petition to the house of commons, subscribed by three admirals and forty-seven captains, not members of parliament, representing that the bill in agitation contained several clauses tending to the injury and dishonour of all naval officers, as well as to the detriment of his majesty’s service; and that the laws already in force had been always found effectual for securing the service of officers on half-pay upon the most pressing occasions: they therefore hoped, that they should not be subjected to new hardships and discouragements; and begged to be heard by their counsel, before the committee of the whole house, touching such parts of the bill as they apprehended would be injurious to themselves and the other officers of his majesty’s navy. This petition was presented to the house by sir John Norris, and the motion for its being read was seconded by sir Peter Warren, whose character was universally esteemed and beloved in the nation. This measure had like to have produced very serious consequences. Many commanders and subalterns had repaired to the admiralty, and threatened in plain terms to throw up their commissions, in case the bill should pass into a law; and a general ferment was begun among all the subordinate members of the navy. A motion was made, that the petitioners, according to their request, should be heard by their counsel; and this proposal was strongly urged by the first orators of the anti-ministerial association; but the minister, confiding in his own strength, reinforced by the abilities of Mr. Pitt, Mr. Lyttelton, and Mr. Fox the secretary at war, strenuously opposed the motion, which upon a division was thrown out by a great majority. The several articles of the bill were afterwards separately debated with great warmth; and though Mr. Pelham had, with the most disinterested air of candour, repeatedly declared that he required no support even from his own adherents, but that which might arise from reason unrestrained and full conviction, he on this occasion reaped all the fruit from their zeal and attachment, which could be expected from the most implicit complaisance. Some plausible amendments of the most exceptionable clauses were offered, particularly of that which imposed an oath upon the members of every court-martial, that they should not, on any account, disclose the opinions or transactions of any such tribunal. This was considered as a sanction, under which any court-martial might commit the most flagrant acts of injustice and oppression, which even parliament itself could not redress, because it would be impossible to ascertain the truth, eternally sealed up by this absurd obligation. The amendment proposed was, that the member of a court-martial might reveal the transactions and opinions of it in all cases wherein the courts of justice, as the law now stands, have a right to interfere, if required thereto by either house of parliament; a very reasonable mitigation, which however was rejected by the majority. Nevertheless, the suspicion of an intended encroachment had raised such a clamour without doors, and diffused the odium of this measure so generally, that the minister thought proper to drop the projected article of war, subjecting the reformed officers of the navy to the jurisdictions of courts-martial; and the bill being also softened in other particulars, during its passage through the upper house, at length received the royal assent.

The flame which this act had kindled, was rather increased than abated on the appearance of a new mutiny-bill, replete with divers innovations tending to augment the influence of the crown, as well as the authority and power of a military jurisdiction. All the articles of war established since the reign of Charles II., were submitted to the inspection of the commons; and in these appeared a gradual spirit of encroachment, almost imperceptibly deviating from the civil institutes of the English constitution, towards the establishment of a military dominion. By this new bill a power was vested in any commander-in-chief, to revise and correct any legal sentence of a court-martial, by which the members of such a court, corresponding with the nature of a civil jury, were rendered absolutely useless, and the commander in a great measure absolute; for he had not only the power of summoning such officers as he might choose to sit on any trial—a prerogative unknown to any civil court of judicature—but he was also at liberty to review and altar the sentence; so that a man was subject to two trials for the same offence, and the commander-in-chief was judge both of the guilt and the punishment. By the final clause of this bill, martial law was extended to all officers on half-pay; and the same arguments which had been urged against this article in the navy-bill, were now repeated and reinforced with redoubled fervour. Many reasons were offered to prove that the half-pay was allotted as a recompence for past service; and the opponents of the bill affirmed, that such an article, by augmenting the dependents of the crown, might be very dangerous to the constitution. On the other hand, the partisans of the ministry asserted, that the half-pay was granted as a retaining fee; and that originally all those who enjoyed this indulgence were deemed to be in actual service, consequently subject to martial law. Mr. Pitt, who at this time exercised the office of paymaster-general, with a rigour of integrity unknown to the most disinterested of all his predecessors in that department, espoused the clause in dispute as a necessary extension of military discipline, which could never be attended with any bad consequence to the liberty of the nation. The remarks which he made on this occasion, implied an opinion that our liberties wholly existed in dependence upon the direction of the sovereign, and the virtue of the army. “To their virtue,” said he, “we trust even at this hour, small as our army is; to that virtue we must have trusted, had this bill been modelled as its warmest opposers could have wished; and without this virtue, should the lords, the commons, and the people of England intrench themselves behind parchment up to the teeth, the sword will find a passage to the vitals of the constitution.” All the disputed articles of the bill being sustained on the shoulders of a great majority, it was conveyed to the upper house, where it excited another violent contest. Upon the question whether officers on half-pay had not been subject to martial law, the judges were consulted and divided in their sentiments. The earl of Bath declared his opinion that martial law did not extend to reformed officers; and opened all the sluices of his ancient eloquence. He admitted a case which was urged, of seven officers on half-pay, who, being taken in actual rebellion at Preston in the year 1715, had been executed on the spot by martial law, in consequence of the king’s express order. He candidly owned, that he himself was secretary at war at that period; that he had approved of this order, and even transmitted it to general Carpenter, who commanded at Preston; but now his opinion was entirely changed. He observed, that when the forementioned rebellion first broke out, the house presented an address to the king, desiring his majesty would be pleased to employ all half-pay officers, and gratify them with whole pay; and, indeed, all such officers were voted on whole pay by the house of commons. They were afterwards apprised of this vote, by an advertisement in the Gazette, and ordered to hold themselves in readiness to repair to such places as should be appointed; and finally commanded to repair by such a day to those places, on pain of being struck off the half-pay list. These precautions would have been unnecessary, had they been deemed subject to martial law, and the penalty for non-obedience would not have been merely a privation of their pensions, but they would have fallen under the punishment of death, as deserters from the service. His lordship distinguished with great propriety and precision, between a step which had been precipitately taken in a violent crisis, when the public was heated with apprehension and resentment, and a solemn law concerted at leisure, during the most profound tranquility. Notwithstanding the spirited opposition of this nobleman, and some attempts to insert additional clauses, the bill having undergone a few inconsiderable amendments, passed by a very considerable majority.