r (besides ships and seamen), and
5,500 of the latter; and they were assisted by about 4,000 militia. The
troops of every kind that surrendered prisoners of war were about 7,000;
but so great was the number of the sick and wounded, that there were
only 3,800 capable of bearing arms."--_Ib._, p. 455.]
[Footnote 54: During the discussion on this question, it had been argued
that the Americans are fed, clothed, and paid by France; they are led on
by French officers; the French and the American armies are incorporated
into one; it was merely a locality that should give name to a war.
France had formerly been fought with success in Germany, and there could
be no solid objection to fighting her in America. General Conway argued
that French troops did not cost more than L40 per man a year, while the
expense of the English troops cost L100 per man a year. General Conway
reminded the House that though seventy-three thousand men were voted and
paid for, we had never above half that number in actual service.
Government had, therefore, only to complete the regiments, and they
would have more men in America than ever they had before. (Annual
Register of Parliament for 1782, pp. 158-161.)]
[Footnote 55: Annual Register of Parliament for 1782, Vol. XXIX., p.
173.]
[Footnote 56: Abridged from the Parliamentary Register for 1782, Vol.
XXV., Chap. vii. See also Lord Mahon's History of England, etc., Vol.
VII., Chap. lxv.
Lord Mahon concludes his account of this Administration as follows:
"Thus ended Lord North's Administration of twelve years. It is certainly
strange, on contemplating these twelve years, to find so many harsh and
rigorous measures proceed from the most gentle and good-humoured of
Prime Ministers. Happy, had but greater firmness in maintaining his own
opinions been joined to so much ability in defending opinions even when
not his own.
"Even as to the disasters and miscarriages, however, which could not be
denied in his Administration, the friends of Lord North contended that
in truth he was not answerable for them. The points in his favour were
argued a few days before his fall by Mr. George Onslow in the House of
Commons. 'Why,' said Mr. Onslow, 'have we in this war with America such
ill success? Mainly,' he continued, 'from the support and countenance
given in that House to American rebellion. The army of Washington had
been called by the Opposition "our army;" the cause of the Americans had
been called "th
|