THREE:On the 9th of June, when the House of Commons went into committee on the Bill, a large number of merchants desired to be heard against it. For several days their statements were heard, and the Portuguese Ambassador also presented a memorial declaring that should the duties on French wines be lowered to those of Portugal, his master would renew the woollen and other duties on the products of Great Britain. This seemed to enforce the mercantile opinions; the sense of the whole country was against the treaty, and the speech of Sir Thomas Hanmer, a Tory, made a deep impression. There was, however, a growing rumour, during the latter days of the debate, that Oxford had given the treaty upa rumour probably not without foundation, for Oxford and Bolingbroke were no longer in unity. The latter, ambitious and unprincipled, was intriguing to oust his more slow and dilatory colleague; and, as the Bill was ostensibly the work of Bolingbroke, probably Oxford was by no means unwilling that it should be thrown out to damage him. When the question, therefore, was put on the 18th of June,[11] that the Bill be engrossed, it was negatived by a majority of one hundred and ninety-four to one hundred and eighty-five. Thus the commercial treaty was lost, much to the joy of the nation, and certainly to its immediate benefit.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
Praesent suscipit sem vel ipsum elementum venenatis.
-Cris Galee
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
Praesent suscipit sem vel ipsum elementum venenatis.
-Yoli Kim Sui
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
Praesent suscipit sem vel ipsum elementum venenatis.
-Loyee Alq
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
Praesent suscipit sem vel ipsum elementum venenatis.
-Mobeen Alexa
