On this evidence, however,
the Duke of Richmond moved that this petition, hollow as it must
have appeared to men of deep reflection, was sufficient ground for a
conciliation of the differences existing between America and the mother
country. He was supported by Lords Shelburne and Sandwich, but the
refusal to answer the petition was defended by Lords Dartmouth and
Lyttleton, and the motion was negatived by a majority of eighty-six
against thirty-three. On the side of government the Americans were
denounced by Lord Lyttleton as audacious rebels; their sentiments as
insiduous and traitorous; and their expressions of loyalty, false and
hollow. On the other hand, opposition justified their conduct, and
patted them on the back by assurances, that their native courage and the
nature of their country rendered them an invincible people. Indeed, it
cannot be doubted, that the views taken by the opposition in the British
parliament, and the sentiments which they uttered on every favourable
occasion, had the effect of confirming the colonists in their opposition
to government, and stimulating them to increased exertions in order to
gain a free, full, and final triumph.

MOTIONS OF THE DUKE OF GRAFTON.

On the 15th of November the Duke of Grafton moved the following
resolutions: "That ministers should lay before the house an account of
the number of forces serving in America, with their several stations,
etc., previous to the commencement of hostilities; that they should lay
before the house the exact state of the army now in America; that
they should produce all the plans that had been adopted for providing
winter-quarters for those troops; that they should also produce an
estimate of the forces now in Great Britain and Ireland; and that they
should, finally, lay before the house an estimate of the military force
necessary to be sent against America, with a precise account of the
number of artillery, etc." In opposing these motions, ministers argued
that nothing would better please the Americans than a full disclosure of
our measures and resources, and that such a disclosure would be contrary
to every rule of office, as well as to every maxim of war and common
sense. The debate wandered to the original causes of the dispute, and
the real object and intention of congress; and after these grounds were
again gone over--the opposition warmly contending that the Americans
were not aiming at independence, and ministers as warmly