It was intended to disable all members of parliament from enjoying places of trust and profit, and particularly levelled against the officers of the army and navy, who had insinuated themselves into the house in such numbers, that this was commonly called the officers' parliament.

The bill passed the house of commons, and was sent up to the lords, by whom it was read a second time and committed; but the ministry employing their whole strength against it, on the report it was thrown out by a majority of two voices.

The earl of Mulgrave again distinguished himself by his elocution, in a speech that was held in great veneration by the people; and, among those who entered a protest in the journals of the house when the majority rejected the bill, was prince George of Denmark, duke of Cumberland.

The court had not collected themselves from the consternation produced by such a vigorous opposition, when the earl of Shrewsbury produced another bill for triennial parliaments, providing that there should be an annual session; that if, at the expiration of three years, the crown should not order the writs to be issued, the lord chancellor, or keeper, or commissioner of the great seal, should issue them _ex officio_, and by authority of this act, under severe penalties.
The immediate object of this bill was the dissolution of the present parliament, which had already sat three sessions, and began to be formidable to the people from its concessions to the ministry.

The benefits that would accrue to the constitution from the establishment of triennial parliaments were very well understood, as these points had been frequently discussed in former reigns.