116

HISTORY OF ENGLAND.

CHAP.

XIX.

16 D 2 .

xvhat had been said in the Committee -would be re-ported to the King, and that His Majesty would notdisregard the general wish of the representatives of hispeople.*

The Commons next proceeded to inquire into the navaladministration, and very soon came to a quarrel with the Lordson that subject. That there had been mismanagement some-where was but too evident. It was hardly possible to acquitboth Russell and Nottingham; and each House stood by itsown member. The Commons had, at the opening of the ses-sion , unanimously passed a vote of thanks to Russell for hisconduct at La Hogue. They now, in the Grand Committee ofAdvice, took into consideration the miscarriages which hadfollowed the battle. A motion was made so vaguely wordedthat it could hardly be said to mean any thing. It was under-stood however to imply a censure on Nottingham, and wastherefore strongly opposed by his friends. On the divisionthe Ayes were a hundred and sixty five, the Noes a hundredand sixty four.**

On the very next day Nottingham appealed to the Lords.He told his story with all the skill of a practised orator, andwith all the authority which belongs to unblemished integrity.He then laid on the table a great mass of papers, which herequested the House to read and- consider. The Peers seem tohave examined the papers seriously and diligently. The resultof the examination was by no means favourable to Russell.Yet it was thought unjust to condemn him unheard; and it wasdifficult to devise any way in which their Lordships could hearhim. At last it was resolved so send the papers down to theCommons with a message which imported that, in the opinionof the Upper House, there was a case against the Admiral

* Grey’s Debates, Nov. 21. 1692; Colt Papers in Tindal.

** Tindal, Colt Papers; Commons’Journals, Jan. H. 169|,