of the power of the House of Commons.  His conduct nine years ago I still hold to be very culpable.  There are, however, many things very culpable that I do not know how to punish.  My opinion on such matters I must submit to the good of the state, as I have done on other occasions,—­and particularly with regard to the authors and managers of the American war, with whom I have acted, both in office and in opposition, with great confidence and cordiality, though I thought many of their acts criminal and impeachable.  Whilst the misconduct of Mr. Pitt and his associates was yet recent, it was not possible to get Mr. Fox of himself to take a single step, or even to countenance others in taking any step, upon the ground of that misconduct and false policy; though, if the matters had been then taken up and pursued, such a step could not have appeared so evidently desperate as now it is.  So far from pursuing Mr. Pitt, I know that then, and for some time after, some of Mr. Fox’s friends were actually, and with no small earnestness, looking out to a coalition with that gentleman.  For years I never heard this circumstance of Mr. Pitt’s misconduct on that occasion mentioned by Mr. Fox, either in public or in private, as a ground for opposition to that minister.  All opposition, from that period to this very session, has proceeded upon the separate measures as they separately arose, without any vindictive retrospect to Mr. Pitt’s conduct in 1784.  My memory, however, may fail me.  I must appeal to the printed debates, which (so far as Mr. Fox is concerned) are unusually accurate.

52.  Whatever might have been in our power at an early period, at this day I see no remedy for what was done in 1784.  I had no great hopes even at the time.  I was therefore very eager to record a remonstrance on the journals of the House of Commons, as a caution against such a popular delusion in times to come; and this I then feared, and now am certain, is all that could be done.  I know of no way of animadverting on the crown.  I know of no mode of calling to account the House of Lords, who threw out the India Bill in a way not much to their credit.  As little, or rather less, am I able to coerce the people at large, who behaved very unwisely and intemperately on that occasion.  Mr. Pitt was then accused, by me as well as others, of attempting to be minister without enjoying the confidence of the House of Commons, though he did enjoy the confidence of the crown.  That House of Commons, whose confidence he did not enjoy, unfortunately did not itself enjoy the confidence (though we well deserved it) either of the crown or of the public.  For want of that confidence, the then House of Commons did not survive the contest.  Since that period Mr. Pitt has enjoyed the confidence of the crown, and of the Lords, and of the House of Commons, through two successive Parliaments; and I suspect that he has ever since, and that he does still, enjoy as large a portion, at least, of