THE
FORMING A CONTINUATION OF THE WORK ENTITLED
"THE PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY OF ENGLAND
FROM THE EARLIEST, PERIOD TO THE YEAR 1803."
PUBLISHED UNDER THE SUPERINTENDENCE OF
T. C. HANSARD.
New Series;
COMMENCING WITH THE ACCESSION OF GEORGE IV.
VOL. I.
COMPRISING THE PERIOD
FROM
THE TWENTY-FIRST DAY OF APRIL
TO
THE TWENTY-SIXTH DAY OF JUNE, 1820.
LONDON:
PRINTED BY T. C. HANSARD, PETERBOROUGH-COURT, FLEET-STREET;
FOR BALDWIN, CRADOCK. AND JOY; J. BOOKER; LONGMAN. HURST, REES, ORME. AND BROWN; J. M. RICHARDSON; BLACK, KINGSBURY, PARBURY, AND ALLEN; J. HATCHARD & SON; J. RIDGWAY & SONS; E. JEFFERY & SON; RODWELL & MARTIN; R. H. EVANS; BUDD AND CALKIN; J. BOOTH; AND T. C. HANSARD.
1820.
ADVERTISEMENT
THE present Volume is, in fact, the
forty-second
In presenting the First Volume of this New Series of The Parliamentary Debates to the public, the Editor avails himself of the opportunity it affords him, of returning his acknowledgments for the liberal support which he has received. The declared object of the First Series of this Work, at its outset in the year 1803 was, to give the Proceedings of both Houses at greater length, and with much greater precision, than it was ever before attempted to give them. To accomplish this object, neither labour nor expense has been spared. Aid of every useful kind has been resorted to, and, in most instances, with complete success. The Editor has felt that to his Work after times would refer, for the Public Character and Conduct of the Members of both Houses who took a share in the important measures therein recorded. He has, there fore, not considered himself at liberty to garble or abridge their Speeches, at his own discretion, and according to his own views of the importance of the matter before him. To his unremitted endeavours to procure from members of both sides of the House, the fullest and most correct reports of what has taken place on every important Debate, those Members will readily bear testimony: And so strictly impartial has he been, that in no single page of the Forty-One Volumes, of which the First Series consists, and all of which have passed through his hands, can, he ventures to assert, an instance of unfair preference or prejudice he pointed out.
In addition to the Debates of both Houses, the Work contains an invaluable Collection of Parliamentary Papers, consisting of many hundred Reports, Estimates, Returns, Treaties, Conventions, Lists of Divisions, &c. &c.; and a regular Series, for the last Seventeen years, of Accounts relative to the Finances, and to the Trade, Navigation, &c. of the United Kingdom. These Documents are exact copies of those laid before Parliament. They are to be met with in no other publication, and will be found eminently useful and convenient to the Reader; to whom, indeed, if his attention be at all turned to subjects of Political Economy, they will be indispensably necessary. Each Volume contains a copious Table of Contents, together with separate Indexes, not only of the Debates in both Houses, but of the names of the several Members who took a part therein. It is hardly necessary to add, that this Second Series of a Work which has found its way into most of the Public Libraries, not merely of this country, but of Europe, will be continued with that activity and perseverance which a reception so favourable is calculated to produce.
The PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY OF ENGLAND, FROM THE EARLIEST PERIOD TO THE YEAR 1803," when the First Series of the above Work commenced, is completed in Thirty-Six Volumes. The Public are therefore now in possession of the only uniform Parliamentary History of the Country that was ever attempted. The plan of the Work will be seen in the following Extract from the Preface to the First Volume:
"Whoever has had frequent occasion to recur to the Proceedings, in Parliament of former times, must have experienced those difficulties which it is the object of the present Work to remove. Merely to find the several works wherein is contained an account of the Parliamentary Proceedings, is, at this day, no easy matter; some of them being very scarce, and others excessively voluminous. Hardly any of them, those of the last twenty years, excepted, are to be purchased regularly at the Booksellers. The far greater part of them are to be come at by accident only; and, of course, sometimes not to be obtained at all. But, supposing them all to be at hand, the price of them is no trifling object; and, in many cases, must present a difficulty not to be easily, or, at least, willingly surmounted. Of these works, taken in their chronological order, the first is, "The Parliamentary or Constitutional History," in Twenty-four Volumes; the second, sir Simonds D'Ewes's "Journal of Queen Elizabeth's Parliaments;" the third, "Proceedings and Debates of the House of Commons in 1620 arid 1621, collected by a member of that House, and published from his Original Manuscript in the Library of Queen's College, Oxford," in Two Volumes; the fourth, "Chandler's and Timberland's Debates," in Twenty-two Volumes; the fifth, "Debates of the House of Com-
"These difficulties surmounted, another, and a still more formidable obstruction to the acquiring of information, is found, not merely in the number and the bulk of the volumes, but also in the want of a good arrangement of the Contents of most of them; and, further, in the immense load of useless matter, quite unauthentic, and very little connected with the real Proceedings of Parliament, to be found in many of them; in the first mentioned work, we find a narrative of battles, sieges, and of domestic occurrences: the real Proceedings of Parliament form but a comparatively small proportion of it; whole pamphlets of the day, and very long ones, being, in many places, inserted just as they were published and sold; and, when we come down even to the Debates by Almon and Debrett (taking in Woodfall and others occasionally), we find, that, in numerous instances, three-fourths of the volume consists of Papers laid before Parliament, of mere momentary utility, repeated in subsequent and more correct statements, and now a mere incumbrance to the reader, and a constantly intervening obstacle to his researches; to which may be added, with respect to all the Debates from Almon's inclusive, downwards, that there is a total want of all that aid which is afforded by well-contrived Running Titles, Tables, and Indexes, and which is so necessary in every Voluminous work, particularly if it relate to the transactions of a long series of years.
"In a Work of this nature, the utmost impartiality is justly expected; and it is with confidence presumed, that a careful perusal of the following pages will convince the reader, that that impartiality has been strictly and invariably adhered to. Nothing has been inserted without due authority; and, as the object has been, not so much to dive into matters of Antiquity, as to preserve what was really useful, many things have been omitted which would have swelled the bulk of the Work, without adding to its usefulness. Nothing, however, has been left out, except what was judged to be spurious or not agreeable to the design of such a Collection; nor any thing added, merely on account of its being favourable to the reputation or the doctrines of any particular party. In short whatever appeared to nave been actually said or done, in either House of Parliament, that had any tendency to what ought to be the chief object of such a Publication, has as far as authentic materials could be procured, been recorded with scrupulous fidelity.
*
*
*
The Editor is preparing for the Press, to be comprised in Two Volumes:
I. A GENERAL INDEX to the Parliamentary History of England, from the earliest Period to the Year
and
II. A GENERAL INDEX to the Parliamentary Debates from the Year
to the Accession of GEORGE THE FOURTH, in
The two Volumes will form a complete Parliamentary Dictionary, or ready Book of Reference to every subject of importance that has, at any time, come before Parliament. The great utility of such a Work, not only to Members of the two Houses, but to every Lawyer and Politician, must be self-evident. As many gentlemen, who have not been regular subscribers to the two Works, may nevertheless be desirous of possessing a general Index to the Political History of their Country, such gentlemen are requested to send in their names to the publishers; as only a very limited number of Copies beyond the usual impression will be printed.
SEPTEMBER 1820.
As the Header will have constant occasion to refer to the
and to the First Series of
the subjoined Tables, which exhibit at one view the period which each Volume of those Works embraces, will be found very useful.
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
Shewing the Years of our Lord, and of the King's Reign, in which the Thirty-six Volumes of THE PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY OF ENGLAND respectively began and ended.
Volume.
Begins.
Ends.
A. D.
An. Reg.
A. D.
An. Reg.
I.
1072.
6
William I.
May 29.
1624.
22
James I.
II.
June 18.
1625.
1
Charles I.
October 27.
1642.
18
Charles I.
III.
October 29.
1642.
18
Charles I.
April 12.
1660,
12
Charles II.
IV.
April 25.
1660.
12
Charles II.
October 10.
1688.
4
James II.
V.
October 10
1688.
4
James II.
March 2.
1702.
13
William III.
VI.
March 8.
1702.
1
Anne.
July 9.
1714.
13
Anne.
VII.
August 1.
1714.
1
George I.
March 10.
1722.
8
George I.
VIII.
October 9.
1722.
9.
George I.
March 14.
1733.
6
George II.
IX.
April 4.
1733.
6
George II.
February 22.
1737.
10
George II.
X.
March 4.
1737.
10
George II.
June 14.
1739.
12
George II.
XI.
November 15.
1739.
13
George II.
February 24.
1741.
14
George II.
XII.
February 26.
1741.
14
George II.
February 25.
1743.
16
George II.
XIII.
March 10.
1743.
16
George II.
January 13.
1747.
20
George II.
XIV.
January 22.
1747.
20
George II.
April 17.
1753.
26
George II.
XV.
May 7.
1753.
26
George II.
April 19.
1764.
4
George III.
XVI.
January 10.
1765.
5
George III.
March 5.
1771.
11
George III.
XVII.
February 11.
1771.
11
George III.
June 22.
1774.
14
George III.
XVIII.
November 29.
1774.
15
George III.
January 23.
1777.
17
George III.
XIX.
January 29.
1777.
17
George III.
December 4.
1778.
19
George III.
XX.
December 7.
1778.
19
George III.
February 10.
1780.
20
George III.
XXI.
February 11.
1780
20
George III
March 25.
1781.
21
George III.
XXII.
March 26.
1781.
21
George III.
May 7.
1782.
22
George III.
XXIII.
May 10.
1782.
22
George III.
December 1.
1783.
24
George III.
XXIV.
December 3.
1783.
24
George III.
February 1.
1785.
25
George III.
XXV.
February 1.
1785.
25
George III.
May 5.
1786.
26
George III.
XXVI.
May 15.
1786.
26
George III.
February 8.
1788.
28
George III.
XXVII.
February 14.
1788.
28
George III.
May 4.
1789.
29
George III.
XXVIII.
May 8.
1789.
29
George III.
March 15.
1791.
31
George III.
XXIX.
March 22.
1791.
31
George III.
December 13.
1792.
33
George III.
XXX.
December 16.
1792.
33
George III.
March 10.
1794.
34
George III.
XXXI.
March 14.
1794.
34
George III.
May 22.
1795.
35
George III.
XXXII.
May 27.
1795.
35
George III.
March 2.
1797.
37
George III.
XXXIII.
March 3.
1797.
37
George III.
November 30
1798.
39
George III.
XXXIV.
December 3
1798.
39
George III.
March 21.
1800.
40
George III.
XXXV.
March 21
1800.
40
George III.
October 29.
1801.
41
George III.
XXXVI.
October 29
1801.
42
George III.
August 12.
1803.
43
George III.
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
Shewing the Years of our Lord, and of the King's Reign, in which the Forty-one Volumes of the First Series of THE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES respectively began and ended.
Volume.
Begins.
Ends.
A. D.
An. Reg.
A. D.
An. Reg.
I.
November 22.
1803.
44
George III.
March 29.
1804.
44
George III.
II.
April 5.
1804.
44
George III.
July 31.
1804.
44
George III.
III.
January 15.
1805.
45
George III.
March 12.
1805.
45
George III.
IV.
March 13.
1805.
45
George III.
May 14.
1805.
45
George III.
V.
May 15.
1805.
45
George III.
July 12.
1805.
45
George III.
VI.
January 21.
1806.
46
George III.
May 6.
1806.
46
George III.
VII.
May 6.
1806.
46
George III.
July 23.
1806.
46
George III.
VIII.
December 15.
1806.
47
George III.
March 4.
1807.
47
George III.
IX.
March 5.
1807.
47
George III.
August 14.
1807.
47
George III.
X.
January 21.
1808.
48
George III.
April 8.
1808.
48
George III.
XI.
April 11.
1808.
48
George III.
July 4.
1808.
48
George III.
XII.
January 19.
1809.
49
George III.
March 7.
1809.
49
George III.
XIII.
March 8.
1809.
49
George III.
March 13.
1809.
49
George III.
XIV.
April 11
1809.
49
George III.
June 21.
1809.
49
George III.
XV.
January 23.
1810.
50
George III.
March 1.
1810.
50
George III.
XVI.
March 2.
1810.
50
George III.
May 17.
1810.
50
George III.
XVII.
May 18.
1810.
50
George III.
June 21.
1810.
50
George III.
XVIII.
November 1.
1810.
51
George III.
February 28.
1811.
51
George III.
XIX.
February 22.
1811.
51
George III.
May 10.
1811.
51
George III.
XX.
May 13.
1811.
51
George III.
July 24.
1811.
51
George III.
XXI.
January 7.
1812.
52
George III.
March 16.
1812.
52
George III.
XXII.
March 17.
1812.
52
George III.
May 4.
1812.
52
George III.
XXIII.
May 5.
1812.
52
George III.
July 30.
1812.
52
George III.
XXIV.
November 24.
1812.
53
George III.
March 9.
1813.
53
George III.
XXV.
March 11.
1813.
53
George III.
May 10.
1813.
53
George III.
XXVI.
May 11.
1813.
53
George III.
July 22.
1813.
53
George III.
XXVII.
November 4.
1813.
54
George III.
June 6.
1814.
54
George III.
XXVIII.
June 7.
1814.
54
George III.
July 30.
1814.
54.
George III.
XXIX.
November 8.
1814.
55
George III.
March 3.
1815.
55
George III.
XXX.
March 6.
1815.
55
George III.
May 1.
1815.
55
George III.
XXXI.
May 2.
1815.
55
George III.
July 12.
1815.
55
George III.
XXXII.
February 1.
1816.
56
George III.
March 6.
1816.
56
George III.
XXXIII
March 7.
1816.
56
George III.
April 25.
1816.
56
George III.
XXXIV.
April 26.
1816.
56
George III.
July 2.
1816.
56
George III.
XXXV.
January 28.
1817.
57
George III.
April 25.
1817.
57
George III.
XXXVI.
April 28.
1817.
57
George III.
July 12.
1817.
57
George III.
XXXVII.
January 27.
1818.
58
George III.
April 30.
1818.
58
George III.
XXXVIII.
April 30.
1818.
58
George III.
June 10.
1818.
58
George III.
XXXIX.
January 14.
1819.
59
George III.
April 30.
1819.
59
George III.
XL.
May 3.
1819.
59
George III.
July 30.
1819.
59
George III.
XLI.
November 23.
1819.
60
George III.
February 28.
1820.
60
George III.
TABLE OF CONTENTS TO VOLUME I.
NEW SERIES.
I. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
III. KING'S SPEECHES.
IV. KING'S MESSAGES.
V. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.
VI. PETITIONS.
VII. PROTESTS.
VIII. LISTS.
I. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
Page
1820. Apr. 21. Meeting of the New Parliament
1
1820. Apr. 27. Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session
13
Petition of the Rev. Mr. Jones
26
1820. May 4. Price of Silver
85
Civil List
86
1820. May 5. Insolvent Debtors
104
1820. May 12. Petition of the Rev. Mr. Jones—Athanasian Creed
305
1820. May 16. Commercial Distress—Petition from Birmingham
388
Earl Stanhope's Motion on the Means of providing Employment for the Poor
395
1820. May 25. Agricultural Distress
521
Civil List Bill
523
1820. May 26. Sunday Newspapers
545
Marquis of Lansdowne's Motion for a Select Committee on the Means of extending and securing the Foreign Trade of the Country
565
1820. May 30. Civil List Bill
628
1820. June 1. Small Debts Recovery Bill
742
1820. June 2. Failure of Banks in the South of Ireland
798
1820. June 6. The King's Message respecting the Arrival of the Queen
870
1820. June 7. Motion for a Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen
886
1820. June 8. Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen ballotted for
985
1820. June 9. Royal Marriage Act.
1007
1820. June 12. Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen
1034
1820. June 13. Scotch Peers
1044
1820. June 16. Insolvent Debtors Bill
1096
Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen
1097
Royal Marriage Act
1099
1820. June 19. Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen.
1136
21. Mutiny Bill
1198
22. Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen
1206
23. Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen
1315
26. Commitment for Libel—Petition of Mr. Butt
1323
Petition from the Queen
1323
II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
1820.
Apr.21. Choice of a Speaker
2
27. Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session
27
28. The Marquis of Hastings's Answer to the Vote of Thanks
38
Borough of Grampound
39
Education of the Poor
39
Catholic Question
39
Reform in Parliament
40
Scotch Representation
40
Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session
40
Droits of the Crown—And Privy Purse
43
Revenues of the Crown
45
The King's Answer to the Address
47
Weights and Measures
47
Courts of Justice in Scotland
48
May 2. Steam Engines and Furnaces
50
Stage Coach Drivers
53
Insolvent Debtors Bill
53
Cato Street Conspiracy—Conduct of George Edwards
54
Civil List
63
3. Wool Tax
72
Civil List
73
Civil List Revenues
75
4. London Bridge
91
Wool lax
92
Royal Burghs of Scotland
94
Court of Exchequer in Scotland
95
May 4. Gibraltar
96
5. Machinery—Petition from Wiltshire
105
Mr. Brougham's Motion respecting the Droits of the Crown and Admiralty
105
8. Wool Tax
165
Commercial Restrictions—Petition of the Merchants of London
165
Civil List
198
9. Sir James Mackintosh's Motion for a Select Committee on the Criminal Laws
227
Grampound Disfranchisement Bill
237
The Queen
241
Motion respecting the Criminal Conduct and Proceedings of George Edwards
242
11. New Post Office
293
Wool Tax
294
Exchequer Bills
297
12. Agricultural Distress
329
Reform in Parliament
332
Civil List—Petition from Liverpool
333
Conduct of the Military at Oldham
334
Commercial Distress—Petition from Birmingham
338
Civil List Bill
343
15. Western Union Canal Bill
345
Conduct of the Military at Oldham
347
Lord Archibald Hamilton's Motion respecting the Barons of the Exchequer in Scotland
347
16. Commercial Restrictions—Petition from the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce
424
Colonel Davies's Motion for a Select Committee on the Military Expenditure of the Country
432
17. Navy Estimates
459
Transactions at Manchester
460
Civil List Bill
461
18. Civil List Bill
475
19. Commercial Restrictions—Petition from Manchester
478
Criminal Laws
480
Grampound Disfranchisement Bill
480
Breach of Privilege—Petition of the Warden of the Fleet Prison
520
Publication of Proceedings in Courts of Justice
521
25. Drogheda Election
530
Agricultural Distress
533
Representation of the People of Scotland
536
Aldborough Election—Qualification of Mr. Antrobus
539
Boston Election
544
26. Sunday Newspapers
599
Breach of Privilege—Warden of the Fleet Prison
601
Boston Election
601
Insolvent Debtors Bill
605
Lord Milton's Motion for the Repeat of the Wool Tax
612
British Museum
626
June 12. Petition of W. A. Beckwith complaining of Damages by Riot
1036
Callington Election
1037
Galway—Right of Election
1039
Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen
1039
Insolvent Debtors Bill
1041
13. Bank of England Accounts
1046
14. Motion respecting Bills for the Regulation of Trade
1050
Irish Paupers Bill
1051
Specifications of Patents
1052
Irish Banks Failures
1053
Mr. Grattan—New Writ for Dublin
1054
Irish Ten per Cent Duties
1066
Mutiny Bill
1072
16. East India Company's Volunteers Bill
1102
Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen.
1103
Irish Banks Failures
1105
Miscellaneous Services
1112
19. Military Insubordination
1147
Communications on the Part of the Queen with his Majesty's Government
1147
The Budget
1161
Miscellaneous Estimates
1179
20. Petition of London Merchants against Alteration of Duties on Timber
1180
Mr. Wilberforce's Notice of a Motion respecting the Queen
1185
Military Insubordination
1187
King's Bench Proceedings Bill
1189
21. Mr. Wilberforce's Notice of a Motion respecting the Queen
1202
22. Mr. Wilberforce's Motion for Adjusting the Differences existing in the Royal Family
1213
23. Labourers Wages Bill
1316
The. Queen
1317
24. Parliamentary Reform
1318
Education of the Poor
1319
Court of Exchequer in Scotland
1319
The Queen's Answer to the Resolutions of the House
1319
Milan Commission
1320
26. Criminal Laws
1338
King's Mews
1338
Motion for a Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen
1339
III. KING'S SPEECHES.
Apr. 27. King's Speech on Opening the Session
11
May 30. African Company
634
Mr. Sumner's Motion for referring the Petitions on the Subject of Agricultural Distresses to a Select Committee
639
31. Prisoners for Contempt of Court
693
Exchequer Bills
694
Petition of George Dewhurst complaining of Ill-treatment in Lancaster Gaol
702
Agricultural Distresses—A Select Committee appointed
705
June 1. Manufacturing Distress—Petition from Paisley
744
Mr. Frederick Campbell's Motion for a Select Committee on the State of the Court of Judicature in Wales.
745
Labourers Wages Bill
768
Linen Bounties
771
Alien Bill
774
2. Timber Duties
800
Marriage Act Amendment Bill
800
Protecting Duties—Ireland
802
Army Estimates
804
Ordnance Estimates
805
Army Estimates
821
5. Reform of Parliament—Petition from Kingston upon Hull
844
Petition from Liverpool in favour of Timber Duties
844
Petition from the Ship-builders and Ship-owners of London in favour of Timber Duties
845
Portsmouth Election
862
Foreign Trade—Select Committee thereon appointed
863
Grampound Disfranchisement Bill
863
Insolvent Debtors Bill
868
6. King's Message respecting the Arrival of the Queen
870
Parliamentary Reform
881
Army and Ordnance Estimates
882
Wilful and Malicious Injuries Bill
884
Irish Paupers
885
7. Boroughbridge Election
902
Breach of Privilege—Warden of the Fleet Prison
904
Transactions at Manchester
904
Irish Still Fines Bill
904
Communication from the Queen
905
Motion for a Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen
906
8. Landlords and Tenants Bill
1000
Protecting Duties—Ireland
1004
9. Bankrupt Laws
1008
Motion for a Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen
1008
Navy Estimates
1009
Loan—Ways and Means
1022
Protecting Duties—Ireland
1032
12. Cork Habour Bill
1035
IV. KING'S MESSAGE.
June 6. King's Message respecting the Arrival of the Queen
870
V. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.
An Account of the Total Produce of all Funds at the Disposal of the Crown
45
Copy of the Proposition made by Lord Hutchinson on the part of his Majesty's Ministers to the Queen, June 4, 1820
873
Copy of the Communication-made from the Queen to the House of Commons, June 7, 1820
905
Copy of the Communications on the Part of the Queen with his Majesty's Government
1147
Copy of the Letter written by the Queen, on seeing that her name was omitted in the Liturgy; dated Rome, March 16, 1820
1317
VI. PETITIONS.
May 8. PETITION of the Merchants of London, respecting Commercial Restrictions
179
11. PETITION of William Cobbett respecting the Coventry Election
295
12. PETITION of the Rev. John Pike Jones
316
30. PETITION of the Corporation of London, for a Reform of Parliament.
632
June 2. PETITION of William Cobbett, respecting the Current Value of Money
839
8. PETITION from Westminster, against the Aliens Regulation Bill
999
12. PETITION from Coventry, complaining of Excise Prosecutions for selling Roasted Wheat
1042
26. PETITION from the Queen to the House of Lords
1329
VII. PROTEST.
May 16. PROTEST against the Rejection of Earl Stanhope's Motion re specting the Means of providing Employment for the Poor
422
VIII. LISTS.
May 3. LIST of the Minority in the House of Commons, on Mr. Hume's Motion respecting the Civil List Revenues
83
5. of the Minority in the House of Commons, on Mr. Brougham's Motion respecting the Droits of the Crown and Admiralty
163
May 8. LIST of the Minority in the House of Commons, on the Motion for taking into consideration the Report of the Committee on the Civil List
226
15. of the Minority in the House of Commons, on Lord Archibald Hamilton's Motion respecting the Barons of the Exchequer in Scotland
386
16. of the Minority on Colonel Davies's Motion respecting the Military Expenditure of the Country
459
June 1. of the Minority in the House of Commons, on the Alien Bill
798
14. of the Minority in the House of Commons, on Sir. H. Parnell's Motion, respecting the Irish Ten per Cent Union Duties
1072
14. of the Minority in the House of Commons, on Lord Nugent's Motion for the Reduction of the Standing Army
1096
16. of the Minority in the House of Commons, on the Expense of the Barrack Department
1124
22. of the Minority in the House of Commons, on Mr. Wilberforce's Motion for adjusting the Differences existing in the Royal Family
134
26. of the Minority in the House of Commons, on the Motion for a Select Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen.
1398
LIST OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS,
As it stood in June 1820.
SPEAKER—The Right Hon. CHARLES MANNERS SUTTON.
Abercromby, hon. J. Calne
Acland, sir T. D. bart. Devonshire
A'Court, C. Ashe, Heytesbury
A'Court, E. H. Heytesbury
Alexander, James, Old Sarum
Allan, John H. Pembroke
Althorp, viscount, Northamptonshire
Ancram, earl, Huntingdon
Anson, sir George, Lichfield
Anson, hon. George, Yarmouth
Autrobus, G. C. Aldborough
Apsley, lord, Cirencester
Arbuthnot, rt. hon. C. St. Germains
Archdall, Mervyn, Fermanaghshire
Ashurst, William Henry, Oxfordshire
Astell, William, Bridgewater
Astley, J. D. Wiltshire
Atwood, Mathias, Callington
Aubrey, sir John, bart. Horsham
Bagwell, rt. hon. Wm. Tipperary
Baillie, John, Heydon
Balfour, John, Orkney
Bankes, George, Corff Castle
Bankes, Henry, Corff Castle
Barham, Jos. Foster, Stockbridge
Barham, John Foster, Stockbridge
Baring, Alex. Taunton
Baring, sir Thomas, bart. Wycombe
Barnard, viscount, Tregony
Barne, Michael, Dunwich
Barrett, S. B. M. Richmond
Barry, rt. hon. John M. Cavanshire
Barton, Nathaniel, Westbury
Bastard, Edm. Pollexfen, Devonshire
Bastard, John, Dartmouth
Bathurst, rt. hon. Charles, Harwich
Bathurst, hon. Seym. T. St. Gerrnains
Beaumont, Thos. Wentw. Northumberland
Becher, William W. Mallow
Beckett, right hon. J. Cockermouth
Bective, earl of, Meathshire
Belfast, earl of, Belfast
Belgrave, viscount, Chester
Bennet, hon. Hen. Grey, Shrewsbury
Benett, John, Wiltshire
Bentinck, lord Fred. Cav. Weobly
Bentinck, lord W. H. Cav. Nottinghamshire
Benyon, Benjamin, Stafford
Beresford, sir J. P. bart. Coleraine
Beresford, lord George, Waterfordshire
Bernal, Ralph, Rochester
Bernard, viscount, Bandon Bridge
Bernard, Thomas, jun. King's County
Binning, lord, Rochester
Birch, Joseph, Nottingham
Blackburne, John, Lancashire
Blair, James Hunter, Wigtownshire
Blair, James, Aldeburgh
Blake, Robert, Arundel
Boswell, Alexander, Plympton
Boughey, sir J. Bart. Staffordshire
Boughton, William E. R. Evesham
Bourne, right hon. W. S. Christchurch
Bouverie, hon. Barthol, Downton
Bradshaw, Robert Haldane, Brackley
Branding, C. I. Northumberland
Bridges, George, London
Bright, H. Bristol
Broadhead, T. H. Yarm. Isle of Wight
Brogden, James, Launceston
Brougham, Henry, Winchelsea
Browne, Dominick, Mayo
Browne, James, Mayo
Browne, right hon. D. Kilkenny
Brown, Peter, Rye
Brownlow, Charles, Armaghshire
Bruce, Robert, Clackmannanshire
Brudenell, lord, Marlborough
Bruen, Henry, Carlowshire
Burdeff, sir Francis, bart. Westminster
Burgh, sir Ulysses B. Carlowshire
Burrell, sir Charles M. bart. New Shoreham
Burrell, Walter, Sussex
Bury, vise. Arundel
Butler, hon. James W. Kilkennyshire
Butterworth, Joseph, Dover
Buxton, John Jacob, Bedwyn
Buxton, Thomas Fowell, Weymouth
Byng, George, Middlesex
Calcraft, John, Wareham
Calcraft, John H. Wareham
Calthorpe, hon. F. G. Hindon
Calvert, Charles, Southwark
Calvert, John, Huntingdon
Calvert, Nicolson, Hertford
Campbell, lord John D. H. Argyleshire
Campbell, hon. John F. Carmarthen
Campbell, Arch. Glasgow, &c.
Campbell, hon. G. P. Nairneshire
Canning, right hon. George, Liverpool
Carew, Rob. Shapland, Wexfordshire
Carhampton, earl of, Lndgershall
Carrol, John, New Ross
Carter, John, Portsmouth
Cartwright, Wm. Ralph, Northamptonshire
Castlereagh, viscount, Downshire
Caulfield, hon. H. Armaghshire
Cavendish, lord G. A. H. Derbyshire
Cavendish, hon. H. F. C. Derby
Cawthorne, I. F. Lancaster
Cecil, lord Thomas, Stamford
Chamberlayne, William, Southampton
Chaplin, Charles, Lincolnshire
Cheere, E. M. Cambridge
Cherry, G. H. Dunwich
Chetwynde, George, Stafford
Chichester, Arthur, Carrickfergus
Childe, W. L. Wenlock
Claughton, Thomas, Newton, Lancashire
Clements, J. M. Leitrimshire
Clerk, sir George, bart. Edinburghshire
Clifford, W. J. Dungarvon
Clifton, lord, Canterbury
Clinton, sir Wm. Henry, Newark
Clive, viscount, Ludlow
Clive, Henry, * Montgomery
Clive, hon. Robert H. Ludlow
Cockburn, sir George, Weobly
Cockerell, sir Charles, bart, Evesham
Cocks, hon. James S. Ryegate
Cocks, hon. John Somers, Hereford
Coffin, sir Tsaac, bait. Ilchester
Coke, Thomas William, Norfolk
Coke, Thomas W. jun. Derby
Colborne, Nich. W. R. Thetford
Cole, hon. sir G. L. Fermanaghshire
Cole, sir C. Glamorganshire
Collett, Eben. John, Cashell
Colquhoun, right hon. A. Dumbartonshire
Colthurst, sir N. C. bart. Cork
Concannon, Lucius, Winchelsea
Congreve, sir Wm. Plymouth
Cooper, Robert B. Gloucester
Cooper, Edward Synge, Sligoshire
Copley, sir John Singleton, Ashburton
Corbet, P. Shrewsbury
Cotes, John, Shropshire
Cotterell, sir J. G. bart. Herefordshire
Courtenay, Thomas Peregrine, Totness
Courtenay, William, Exeter
Coussmaker, George, Kinsale
Cranborne, viscount, Hertford
Crawford, Arthur J. Old Sarum
Crawley, Samuel, Honiton
Creevey, Thomas, Appleby
Cripps, Joseph, Cirencester
Croker, John W. Bodmyn
Crompton, Samuel, Retford
Crosbie, James, Kerryshire
Cuffe, James, Traee
Cumming, George, Fortrose
Cunningham-Fairlie, sir William, bart. Leominster
Curteis, E. J. Sussex
Curtis, sir Wm. bart. London
Curwen, John Christian, Cumberland
Curzon, hon. Robert, Clitherow
Cust, hon. William, Clitherow
Cust, hon. Edward, Grantham
Cust, hon. Peregrine, F. Honiton
Dalrymple, J. A. Appleby
Daly, James, Galwayshire
Davenport, Davies, Cheshire
Davies, Thomas Henry, Worcester
Davies, Richard Hart, Bristol
Dawkins, James, Hastings
Dawkins, Henry, Boroughbridge
Dawson, Geo. Rob. Londonderry County
Dawson, J. H. M. Clonmell
De Crespigny, sir W. C. Southampton
Deerhurst, viscount, Worcester
Denison, Wm. Joseph, Surrey
Denman, Thomas, Nottingham
Dent, John, Poole
Dickinson, William, Somersetshire
Divett, T. Gatton
Dobson, John, Rye
Domville, sir Compton, Bossiney
Don, sir Alexander, Roxburghshire
Douglas, John, Orford
Douglas, W.Rob. Keith, Dumfries, &c.
Dovetoh, Gabriel, Lancaster
Dowdeswell, John Edm. Tewkesbury
Downie, Rob. Inverkeithing, &c.
Drummond, James, Perthshire
Dugdale, Dugdale Stratf. Warwickshire
Dunally, lord, Okehampton
Duncannon, viscount, Malton
Duncomb, W. Grimsby
Duncombe, Charles, Newport, Isle of Wight
Dundas, Charles, Berkshire
Dundas, Thomas, Richmond
Dundas, right hon. Wm. Edinburgh
Dunlop, James, Kirkcudbright
Ebrington, lord viscount, Tavistock
Edmonstone, sir C. bart. Stirlingshire
Edwards, hon. E. H. Blechingly
Egerton, Wilbraham, Cheshire
Elford, Jonathan, Westbury
Eliot, hon. William, Liskeard
Ellice, Edward, Coventry
Ellis, Charles Rose, Seaford
Ellis, hon. G. J. Seaford
Ellis, Henry, Boston
Ellison, Cuthbert, Newcastle upon Tyue
Estcourt, Thomas Grimston, Devizes
Evans, William, Retford
Evelyn, Lyndon, St. Ives
Fane, John, Oxfordshire
Fane, John Thomas, Lime Regis
Fane, Vere, Lime Regis
Farqnharson, Arch. Elgin, &c.
Farrand, Robert, Hedon
Fellowes, Wm. Henry, Huntingdonshire
Ferguson, James, Aberdeenshire
Fergusson, sir R. C. Dysart, &c.
Ferrars-Townsend, lord C. Tamworth
Fetherston, sir G. bart. Longfordshire
Fife, earl of, Bamfsbire
Finch, George, Lymington
Fitzgerald, right hon. William, Clare
Fitzgerald, right hon. M. Kerryshire
Fitzgerald, lord W. C. Kildareshire
Fitz-Gibbon, hon. Richard, Limerickshire
Fitz-Harris, viscount, Wilton
Fitzroy, lord Charles, Thetford
Fitzroy, lord John, Bury St. Edmonds
Fleming, John, Hampshire
Foley, Thomas, Droitwich
Folkes, sir M. B. bart. King's Lynn
Folkestone, viscount, New Sarum
Forbes. Charles, Malmesbnry
Forbes, viscount, Longfordshire
Forester, Francis, Wenlock
Foster, right hon. John, Louthshire
Fox, G. Lane, Beverley
Frankland, Robert, Thirsk
Frernantle, Wm. Henry, Buckingham
French, Arthur, Roscommonshire
Fynes, Henry, Aldborough
Gascoyne, Isaac, Liverpool
Gaskell, Benjamin, Malden
Gifford; sir Robert, Eye
Gilbert, Davies, Bodmyn
Gipps, George, Ripon
Gladstone, John, Woodstock
Glenorchy, lord, Oakhampton
Gooch, Thumas Sherlock, Suffolk
Gordon, Robert, Cricklade
Gosset, William, Truro
Goulburn, Henry, West Looe
Graham, James, St. Ives
Graham, Sandford, Ludgershall
Graham, sir James, bart. Carlisle
Grant, J. P. Tavistock
Grant, Alex. Cray, Lestwithiel
Grant, right hon. Charles, Inverness-shire
Grant, Francis Wm. Elginshire
Grant, Geo. Macpherson, Sutherlandshire
Graves, lord, Milborne Port
Greenhill Russell, Robt. Thirsk
Grenfell, Pascoe, Penryn
Greville, hon. sir C. J. Warwick
Griffith, John Wynne, Denbigh
Grossett, J. R. Chippenham
Grosvenor, Rich. E. D. Romney
Grosvenor, Thomas, Chester
Guise, sir B. Wm. bait. Glohcestershire
Gurney, Hudson, Newton, Hants
Gurney, Richard H. Norwich
Haldimand, W. Ipswich
Hamilton, lord Arch. Lanark shire
Hamilton, sir H. D. bart. Haddington, &c.
Hamilton, Hans. Dublinshire
Harbord, hon. E. Shaftesbury
Hardinge, sir H. Durham
Hare, hon. Richard, Corkshire
Hart, George Vaughan, Donegalshire
Harvey, Charles, Carlow
Harvey, Daniel W. Colchester
Harvey, sir E. Essex
Heathcote, sir Gilb. bart. Rutlandshire
Heathcote, J. G. Boston
Heron, sir Robt. Peterborough
Heygate, William, Sudbury
Hill, lord Arthur, Downshire
Hill, right hon. sir G. F. Londonderry
Hobhouse, J. C. Westminster
Hodson, John, Wigan
Holford, G. Queenborough
Holmes, sir L. T. W. bart. Newport, Isle of Wight
Holmes, William, Bishop's Castle
Honeywood, William, P.Kent
Hope, hon. sir Alex. Linlithgowshire
Hope, sir Wm. Johnston, Dumfriesshire
Hornby, Edmund, Preston
Horrocks, Samuel, Preston
Hotham, lord, Leominster
Houldsworth, Thomas, Pontefract
Howard, hon. F. G Castle-Rising
Howard-Molyueux-Howard, lord Henry Thomas, Steyning
Howard, hon. Wm. Morpeth
Hudson, Harrington, Hellestone
Hughes, W. Lewis, Wallingford
Hughes, James, Grantham
Hulse, sir Charles, West Looe
Hume, Joseph, Aberdeen, &c.
Hurst, Robert, Horsham
Huskisson, right hon. William, Chichester
Hutchinson, hon. C. H. Cork
Hyde, John, Youghall
James, William, Carlisle
Jenkinson, hon. C. C. C. Grinstead
Jervoice, G. P. Hampshire
Innes, sir Hugh, bart. Kirkwall, &c
Innes, John, Grampound
Jocelyn, viscount, Louthshire
Jolliffe, Hylton, Petersfield
Irving, John, Bramber
Kennedy, Thus. F, Ayr, &c.
Kerr, David, Athlone
King, sir J. D. bart. Wycombe
Kingsborough.viscount, Corkshire
Kinnersley, Wm. S. Newcastle, Staflford
Knatchbull, sir Edward, bart. Kent
Knox, hon. Thomas, Dungannon
Kynaston-Powell,sir J. Shropshire
Lamb, hon, William, Hertfordshire
Lambton, John George, Durham
Langstone, J. H. Woodstock
Lascelles, viscount, Northallerton
Latouche, Robert, Kildareshire
Legge, hon. Heneage, Banbury
Legh, Thomas, Newton, Lancashire
Legh-Keck, George Ant. Leicestershire
Leigh, James Henry, Winchester
Lemon, sir William, bart. Cornwall
Lennard, Thomas, Barrett, Ipswich
Lennox, lord John George, Chichester
Leslie, Charles Powell, Monaghanshire
Lester, Benj. Lester, Poole
Lethbridge, sir T. B. bart, Somersetshire
Lewis, Thomas Frankland, Beaumaris
Lewis, Wyndham, Cardiff
Lindsay, lord, Wigan
Lindsay, hon. H. Forfar, &c.
Littleton, Edw. John, Staffordshire
Lloyd, James Martin, New Shoreham
Lloyd, sir Edward Price, bt. Flint
Lockhart, William Elliot, Selkirkshire
Lock hart, J. I. Oxford
Long, right hon. Charles, Haslemere
Lovaine, lord, Beralston
Lowtber, hon. H., Cecil, Westmorland
Lowther, John, Cumberland
Lowther,. John H. Cockerraouth
Lowther, viscount, Westmorland
Loyd, S. J. Hythe
Lucy, George, Fowey
Lushington,Steph. R. Ganterbury
Lushington, S. Ilchester
Luttrell, Henry Fownes, Minehead
Luttrell, J. Fownes, Minehead
Maberly, John, Abingdon
Maberly, William L. Northampton
Macdonald, James, Calne
Macdonald, Ronald George, Plympton
Mackintosh, sir James, bart. Knaresborough
Mackenzie, Thomas, Ross-shire
M'Naughten, E. A. Orford
Macqueen, Thomas Potter, East Looe
Maclocks, Wm. Alex. Chippenham
Magenis, Richard, Enniskillen
Mahon, sir R. Ennis
Mahon, hon. Stephen, Roscommonshire
Manners, lord Charles S. Cambridgeshire
Manners, lord Robert, Leicestershire
Mansfield, John, Leicester
Marjoribanks, sir J. bart. Berwickshire
Marjoribanks, S. Hythe
Markham, J. Portsmouth
Marryat, Joseph, Sandwich
Martin, sir Thos. B. Plymouth
Martin, Richard, Galwayshire
Martin, James, Tewkesbury
Maule, hon. Wm. R. Forfarshire
Maxwell, John, Renfrewshire
Maxwell, J. W. Downpatrick
Metcalf, H. J. Drogheda
Metdge, John, Dundalk
Milbank, Mark, Camelford
Mildmay, Paulet St. J. Winchester
Mills, Charles, Warwick
Milne, sir David, bart. Berwick
Milton, viscount, Yorkshire
Mitchell, John, Kingston-upon-Hull
Monck, J. B. Reading
Money, Wm. Taylor, St. Michael
Mooteith, H. J. Selkirk, &c.
Montgomery, sir J. bart. Peebleshire
Montgomerie, James, Ayrshire
Moore, Peter, Coventry
Moore, A. Shaftesbury
Mordannt, sir C. bart. Warwickshire
Morsan, sir Charles, bart. Monmouthshire
Morgan, George Gould, Brecon
Morland, sirS. B, bart. St. Mawes
Mostyn, sir Thomas, hurt. Elintshire
Mountcharles, earl, Donegalshire
Mundy, Edw. Millor, Derbyshire
Monday, George, Boroughbridge
Neale, sirHarry.B, bart Lymington
Needham, hon. Fran. Newry
Neville, hon. Richard, Berkshire
Newman, Robt. Win. Exeter
New port, rt. hon, sir J. bart. Waterford
Nicholl, rt. hon. sir J., Bedwyn
Nightingale, S. M. Eye
Noel, sir Gerard Noel, bart. Rutland
Nolan, Michael, Barnstaple
North, Dudley, Newtown, Hants.
Northey, William, Newport, Cornwall
Nugent, sir G. bart. Buckingham
Nugent, lord, Aylesbury
O'Brien, sir Edw. bart. Clare
O'Callaghan, James, Tregony
O'Grady, S. Limerickshire
O'Hara, Charles, Sligoshire
Ommaney, sir Francis M. Barnstaple
O'Neil, hon. J. R. Bruce, Antrimshire
Onslow, Arthur, Guildford
Ord, William, Morpeth
Osborne, lord F. G. Cambridgeshire
Ossulstone, lord, Berwick
Owen, sir John, Pembrokeshire
Paget, hon. Berkeley, Milborae Port
Paget, hon. sir Charles, Carnarvon
Pakenbam, hon. H. Rob. Westmeath County
Palk, sir L. V. bart. Asbburton
Palmer, Charles Fyshe, Reading
Palmer, Charles, Bath
Palmerstone, viscount, Cambridge University
Pares, Thomas, Leicester
Parnell, sir Henry, bart. Queen's. County
Parnell, William, Wicklowshire
Parsons John, King's County
Pearse, John, Devizes
Pechell, sir Thomas B. Downton
Peel, right hon. Robert, Oxford University
Peels William Yates, Tamworth
Peirse, Henry, Northallerton
Pelham, hon. Charles A. Lincolnshire
Pellew, hon. Powell, B. Launceston
Pennant, G. H. D. Romney
Percy, hon. H. Beralston
Percy, hon. W. H. Stamford
Phillimore, Josephs St. Mawes
Philips, George, Wotton Basset
Philips, George Richard Steyning
Phipps, hpn. Edm. Scarboroughoa
Pitt, Joseph, Cricklade
Pitt, William Morton, Dorsetshire
Plumer, William, Higham Ferrers
Plumer, John, Hindon
Plunket, right hoh. W. C. Dublin University
Pole, sir Peter, bart. Yarmouth, Isle of Wight
Pole, right bob. W. W. Queen's County
Pollen, sir J. hart. Andover
Pollihgton, viscount, Pontefract
Ponsonby, hon. Fred. C. Kilkennyshire
Portman, Edw. Berkeley, Dorsetshire
Powell, William Edward, Cardiganshire
Power, Richard, Waterfordshire
Powlett, hon. W. I. F. Durham County
Prendergast, M. G. Galway
Price, Robert, Herefordshire
Price, Richard, New Radnor
Pringle, sir William H. Liskeard
Prettie, hon. F. A. Tipperary
Proby, hon. Gran. Lev. Wicklowshire
Pryse, Pryse, Cardigan
Pym, Francis, Bedfordshire
Rae, sir W. bart. Crail, &c.
Raine, Jonathan, Newport, Cornwall
Ramsbottom, John, jun. Windsor
Ramsay, sir A. bare. Kincardineshire
Ramsden, John Charles, Malton
Ricardo, David Portarlington
Rice, G. R. Carmarthen
Ricketts, C. M. Dartmouth
Rickford, William, Aylesbury
Ridley, sir Matt. White, bart. Newcastle-upon-Tyne
Robarts, Abraham W. Maidstone
Robarts, William Tierney, St. Albans
Robarts, G. J. Wallingford
Roberts, Wilson, A. Bewdley
Robertson, Alexander, Grampound
Robinson, right hon. Fr. J. Ripon
Robinson, sir G. bart. Northampton
Rochfort, Gustavus, H. Westmeathshire
Rocksavage, earl of, Castle Rising
Rogers, Edward, Bishop's Castle
Rose, right hon. George H. Christchurch
Rowley, sir William bart. Suffolk
Rumbold, Charles E. Yarmouth
Russell, Matthew, Saltash
Russel, J. W. Gatton
Russell, lord John Huntingdonshire
Russell, lord George W. Bedford
Ryder, right hon. Richard, Tiverton
Sandon, viscount, Tiverton
Scarlett, James, Peterborough
Scott, Samuel, Whitchurch
Scott, sir William, knt. Oxford University
Scott, J. Bridport
Scott, hon. W. H. I. Hasting
Scourfield, W. H, Haverfordwest
Scudamore, Rich. Phil, Hereford
Sebright, sir John, S. bart. Hertfordshire
Sefton, earl of, Droitwich
Seymour, Horace, Lisbura
Seymour, H. J. Hugh, Antrimshire
Shaw, Robert, Dublin
Sheldon, Ralph, Wilton
Shelley, sir John barl. Lewes
Shiffner, sir George, bart. Lewes
Sibthorp, Coningsby W. Lincoln
Smith, George, Wendover
Smith, John, Midhurst
Smith, Abel, Midhurst
Smith, Christopher, St. Albans
Smith, hon. Robert, Bucking hamshire
Smith, Samuel, Wendover
Smith, Thos. Assheton, Andover
Smith, William, Norwich
Smith, Robert, Lincoln
Smyth, John Henry, Cambridge University
Sneyd, Nathaniel, Cavanshire
Somerset, lord G. C. H. Monmouthshire
Somerset, lord R. E. H. Gloucestershire
Somerville, sir M. bt. Meathshire
Sotheron F. Nottinghamshire
Spurrier, C. Bridport
Stanley, lord, Lancashire
Staunton, sir George bart. St. Michael
Stewart, Alexander R. Londonderryshire
Stewart, hon. J. H. K. Wigton, &c.
Stewart, W. Tyrone County
Stewart, right hon. sir J. bart. Tyrone County
Stopford, lord, Wexfordshire
Strathaven, lord, Grinstead
Strutt, Joseph Holden, Malden
Stuart-Wortley, Jas. A. Yorkshire
Stuart, lord P. J. Bute
Stewart, William, Armagh
Sumner, Geo. Holme, Surrey
Suttie, sir James, bart. Haddingtonshire
Sutton, rt. hon. C. M. Scarborough
Swann, Henry, Penryn
Sykes, Daniel, Kingston-upon-Hull
Talbot, Rich. Wogan.Dublinshire
Tavistock, marq. of, Bedfordshire
Taylor, sir Herbert, Windsor
Taylor, Charles William, Wells
Taylor, George Watson, East Looe
Taylor, M. Angelo, Durham City
Temple, earl, Buckinghamshire
Tennyson, Charles, Grimsby
Thompson, William, Callington
Thynne, lord John, Bath
Tierney, rt. hon. George, Knaresborough
Titchfield marq. of, Blechingley
Townshend, hon. H. G. P. Whitchurch
Townshend, lord J. N. B. Helles-ton
Townshend, lord C. Tamworth
Tremayne, John Hearle, Cornwall
Trench, F. W. Cambridge
Tulk, C. A. Sudbury
Tudway, John Payne, Wells
Twiss, Horace, Wootton Bassett
Tynte, C. K. Bridgewater
Tyrwhit-Drake, Thos. Agmondesham
Tyrwhit-Drake, Wm. Agmondesham
Upton, hon. Arthur P. Bury St. Edmonds
Ure, Masterton, Weymouth
Uxbridge, earl of, Angleseyshire
Valletort, viscount, Fowey
Vansittart, rt. bon. N. Harwich
Vaughan, sir R. W. bart. Merionethshire
Vereker hon. J. Pren. Limerick
Vernon, Granville G. Ven. Lichfield
Villiers, right hon. J. C. Queenborough
Vivian, sir R. H. Truro
Walker, Joshua, Aideburgh
Wall, Charles Baring, Guddford
Wallace, rt. hon. Thos. Weymouth
Walpole, lord, King's Lynn
Ward, hon. John Wm. Bossiney
Ward, Robert, Haslemere
Warre, J. A. Taunton
Warren, Charles, Dorchester
Warrender, sir G. bart. Sandwich
Webb, Edward, Gloucester
Wells, J. Maidstone
Wemyss, J. Fife
Westenra, hon. H. R. Monaghanshire
Western, Charles Callis, Essex
Wetherell, C. Oxford
Wharton, John, Beverley
Whitbread, Wm. Henry, Bedford
Whitbread, S. C. Middlesex
White, Luke, Leitrimshire
Whitmore, Thomas, Bridgenorth
Whitmore, William, Bridgenorth
Wigram, sir Robert, Lestwithiel
Wigram, W. Wexford
Wilberforce, William, Bramber
Wilbraham, Edw. B. Dover
Wildman, James B. Colchester
Wilkins, Walter, Radnorshire
Williams, Owen, Marlow
Williams, sir Robert, bart. Carnarvonshire
Williams, Robert, Dorchester
Williams, William, Weymouth
Williams, T. P. Marlow
Willoughby, Henry, Newark
Wilmot, Robert J. Newcastle, Stafford
Wilson, sir Robert, Southwark
Wilson, Thomas, London
Wilmington, S. T. Worcestershire
Wodehouse, Edmond, Norfolk
Wodehouse, hon. J. Marlborough
Wood, Matthew, London
Wood, Thomas, Breconshire
Worcester, marq. of, Monmouth
Wrottesley, Henry, Braekley
Wyndham, Wadham, New Saram
Wynne, Owen, Sligo
Wynn, Chas. Watkin Win. Montgomeryshire
Wynn, sir W. Will. bart. Denbighshire
Wyvill, M. York
Yarmouth, earl of, Camelford
Yorke, sir Jos. Sydney, Ryegate.
LIST OF THE SIXTEEN PEERS OF SCOTLAND.
Bruce, Thomas, earl of Elgin and Kincardine
Colville, John, baron Colville
Dalrymple, John, earl of Stair
Douglas, Charles, marq. Queensberry
Erskine, Thomas, earl of Kellie
Forbes, Ochonear J. baron Forbes
Fraser, Geo, Alex, baron Saltoun
Gray, Francis, baron Gray
Hamilton, Montgomery, Robert baron Belhaven
Hay, George, marquis Tweedale
Kerr, William, marquis Lothian
Lindsay, Alex, earl of Balcarras
Napier, Francis, baron Napier
Primrose, J. A. earl of Roseberry
Ramey, Home, Alex, earl of Home
St. Clair, Charles, baron Sinclair
LIST OF THE KING'S MINISTERS,
As it stood in June
CABINET MINISTERS.
Earl of Harrowby
Lord President of the Council.
Lord Eldon
Lord High Chancellor.
Earl of Westmoreland
Lord Privy Seal.
Earl of Liverpool
First Lord of the Treasury.
Right Hon. Nicholas Vansittart
Chancellor and Under-Treasurer of the Exchequer, and Chancellor of the Exchequer for Ireland.
Viscount Melville
First Lord of the Admiralty.
Duke of Wellington
Master-General of the Ordnance.
Viscount Sidmouth
Secretary of State for the Home Department.
Viscount Castlereagh
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
Earl Bathurst
Secretary of State for the Department of War and the Colonies.
Right Hon. George Canning
President of the Board of Control for the Affairs of India.
Right Hon. Charles Bragge Bathurst
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.
Right Hon. W. W. Pole
Master of the Mint.
Right Hon. F.J. Robinson
Treasurer of the Navy, and President of the Board of Trade.
Earl of Mulgrave
NOT OF THE CABINET.
Viscount Palmerston
Secretary at War.
Right Hon. Charles Long
Pay master-General of the Forces.
Earl of Chichester
Joint Postmaster-General.
Marquis of Salisbury
Right Hon. Charles Arbuthnot
Joint Secretaries of the Treasury.
S. R. Lushington, esq.
Right Hon. Thomas Wallace
Vice-President of the Board of Trade.
Right Hon. Thos. Plumer
Master of the Rolls.
Right Hon. Sir John Leach
Vice Chancellor.
Sir Robert Gifford
Attorney General.
Sir John Copley
Solicitor General.
PERSONS IN THE MINISTRY OF IRELAND.
Earl Talbot
Lord Lieutenant.
Lord Manners
Lord High Chancellor.
Right Hon. Charles Grant
Chief Secretary.
Right Hon. Sir G. F. Hill
Vice Treasurer.
THE Parliamentary Debates
During the First Session of the Seventh Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, appointed to meet at Westminster, the Twenty-first Day of April 1820, in the First Year of the Reign of His Majesty King GEORGE the Fourth
1820.
1
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, April 21, 1820.
MEETING OF THE NEW PARLIAMENT.]
This being the day appointed for the meeting of the New Parliament, several peers assembled at two o'clock. Soon after that hour the Lord Chancellor, the archbishop of Canterbury, the duke of Wellington, the earl of Westmoreland, and the earl of Shaftesbury, took their seats in front of the throne as commissioners. The Lord Chancellor directed the deputy gentleman usher of the Black Rod to proceed to the Commons, and summon that House to attend at their lordships' bar forthwith. Mr. Quarme, the deputy usher, proceeded accordingly to the House of Commons, and soon after returned, accompanied by the clerks of that House, and a considerable number of the members. The Lord Chancellor stated, that his majesty had been pleased to order letters patent to be issued for the appointment of certain lords therein named to open the parliament, which letters patent the lords and gentlemen present would now hear read—The commission being read, the Lord Chancellor said, that in obedience to his majesty's commands, he had to inform the lords and gentlemen then in attendance, that as soon as a sufficient number of members of both Houses should be sworn, his majesty would declare the causes for the assembling of this parliament. In the mean time, it was his majesty's pleasure that the gentlemen of the House of Commons should return to the place where they
2
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, April 21, 1820.
CHOICE OF A SPEAKER.]
Many of the members of the new parliament having assembled in the House of Commons at half past two, the yeoman usher of the Black Rod appeared at the bar of the House, and having proceeded to the table, informed the members that they were required by the Lords Commissioners to attend the House of Peers to hear the Commission read. After they had returned,
Sir William Scott
rose for the purpose of submitting a motion to supply the vacancy in the honourable office of Speaker. He had never claimed the attention of the House with more unmixed satisfaction, from a conviction that the opinion he entertained upon this subject was universal among the honourable gentlemen whom he was addressing. Although the distinguished individual who had presided over the deliberations of the House during the two last parliaments had perhaps the most indisputable title again to fill the same office, he could not but be
3
4
Mr. Holme Sumner
seconded the motion. He said, he had not sat so long in parliament without having obtained some knowledge of the arduous duties of the Speaker: the great increase of public business had of late added much to the severity of the burthen. In thus supporting the proposition of the right hon. mover he was aware that he was placing himself in a situation to which he had no other claim than the length of time during which he had filled a seat in parliament: his service as a representative had taught him how much of the regularity and dignity of their proceedings were connected with the office of Speaker. If he had had to recommend a gentleman who was unknown, it would have been proper to have entered at some length into the foundation of his claim; but, as had been already remarked, the individual now proposed had proved himself, in every way, worthy of the confidence and approbation of the House. As be had never known Mr. Manners Sutton but in his public capacity, he could not propose him with the partiality of private friend-
5
Mr. Manners Sutton
rose amid the cheers of the House. He said, he hoped that neither the right hon. gentleman who had moved his nomination in a manner so
6
7
Lord Castlereagh
said, that, in the situation in which the House now found itself, the only question that remained was that of adjournment; but he hoped he might be permitted, in the name of the House, as well as for himself, to offer his congratulation on the choice that had just been made. From the manner in which the proposition of his right hon. friend had been received, it was obvious that the House was anxious to bestow on the individual now appointed to preside over its discussions, the highest mark of its approbation and confidence; and there could be no such mark in this free country more distinguished, than that of being rendered the first commoner of the empire. It was undoubtedly a matter of proud satisfaction, that at the period when the Speaker was placed in the chair, all opinions were united in his favour. He was sure that the House would feel what had been already observed, that, without touching upon the peculiar importance of the times in which we lived (and certainly that man must take a very superficial view of the condition of affairs who should consider them but ordinary times), the office of Speaker included many important duties connected with the jarring interests of this mighty empire, while parliament was. devoting its attention to promote its welfare and. prosperity. It
8
Mr. Brougham,
in the absence of those more competent and more worthy generally to express the feelings of those who sat on his side of the House, trusted that it would not be thought presumptuous if he added his testimony to that of the hon. gentleman who had preceded him. He took the liberty, therefore, to congratulate, first the Speaker, but most of all the House itself, and not less the House than the whole Commons of England, upon the free choice which had now fallen, for the third time, upon the same individual. He was sure that he expressed only the general sentiment in the wish that the Speaker now elected might continue with the enjoyment of health and long life to fill a station equally necessary for the support of the privileges of the House, and for the preservation of the liberties of, the people at large; and the duties of which, he grieved to say, by the common consent of all, were not likely to be lightened. It was a matter of most sincere congratulation to the House and to the country, that it had again the inestimable benefit of having the chair filled by one who had shown himself, in all the more important, as well as in the less material parts of the functions of his situation, eminently gifted for their discharge; who had upon every occasion proved that he was indeed the depository of the truest dignity of the House, by wearing the honours conferred upon him both with firmness and meekness. It formed one of his highest and most essential titles to the office, that on all necessary occasions he had evinced the courage as well as the capacity to protect the sacred privileges of the House from infraction, under whatever pretext, whether assaulted by lawless violence, or
9
The House then adjourned.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Saturday, April 22, 1820.
The deputy usher of the Black Rod was sent to the House of Commons to desire their attendance. Shortly afterwards, the Speaker, followed by a great number of other members, came to the bar.
Mr. Manners Sutton
said:—My lords, I have the honour to announce to your lordships, in the name of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, that his majesty's faithful Commons have proceeded to the choice of a Speaker, and that that choice has fallen upon me. I am fully aware, my lords, of the arduous duties of the situation to which I have thus been chosen, and of my own insufficiency to perform those duties. Should, however, it be his majesty's pleasure to reject the choice thus made by his faithful Commons, it is consolatory to me to know that there are many members of the House much better qualified than myself to fulfil the office of Speaker, upon any one of whom their choice may most advantageously devolve.
The Lord Chancellor
—Mr. Manners Sutton; his majesty being fully aware of your tried ability and zeal for the public service, has commanded us to signify his most gracious approbation of the choice made by his faithful Commons of you to be their Speaker.
The Speaker
—My lords, I humbly submit myself to his majesty's most gracious pleasure. It becomes, therefore, my duty, in the name of his majesty's faithful Commons, to claim their ancient and undoubted privileges, namely, freedom from arrest and molestation for themselves, their servants and estates, freedom of debate, and free access to his majesty whenever occasion shall require it. I have also, coy lords, further to request, in the name of his majesty's faithful Commons, that the most favourable construction may be put upon all their proceedings, and that if any mistake should arise, it may be imputed to me, and not to them.
The Lord Chancellor
—Mr. Speaker; we have it in command from his majesty, most graciously to allow to his faithful Commons all the privileges and immuni-
10
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Saturday, April 22, 1820.
The House met at two o'clock, and was immediately after summoned by the Black Rod to the House of Peers. On their return,
The Speaker
informed the House, that they had been in the House of Peers, where the commissioners, authorized by his majesty's commission, had communicated to him that his majesty had been graciously pleased to approve of their choice of him as Speaker. He had thereupon immediately proceeded to claim for them their ancient rights and privileges of freedom of speech, freedom from arrest for themselves and servants, free access to the royal presence, &c. all of which his majesty had been graciously pleased to grant to them in as full and ample manner as ever had been granted on any former occasion. He must again express the deep sense of gratitude which he felt to the House for having thus conferred on him this, the highest mark of confidence in their power; and he must now implore them to give him their constant support to enable him to preserve their privilege which were not only theirs, but the privileges of all the Commons of England. He had also to entreat their constant and unremitting support and assistance in preserving the established rules and orders of the House; not less necessary for the preservation of decency and regularity in their proceedings, than they were for the convenient dispatch of business. It should be his constant study so to discharge the duties of his high situation as to give satisfaction to the House, and in such a manner as should be most useful to the public, and conducive to his own honour. The first business which gentlemen had now to attend the was, to take the several
11
The Speaker then proceeded to take the oaths himself, and was followed by numerous other members.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, April 27, 1820.
THE KING'S SPEECH ON OPENING THE SESSION.]
This day his majesty came in state to the House of Peers, and being seated on the throne, the gentleman usher of the Black Rod was directed to summon the Commons to attend. The Speaker immediately obeyed the summons, and presented himself at the bar, attended by more than one hundred members. His majesty then delivered the following most gracious Speech to both Houses:
"My Lords and Gentlemen;
"I have taken the earliest occasion of assembling you here, after having recurred to the sense of my people.
"In meeting you personally for the first time since the death of my beloved father, I am anxious to assure you, that I shall always continue to imitate his great example, in unceasing attention to the public interests, and in paternal solicitude for the welfare and happiness of all classes of my subjects.
"I have received from foreign powers renewed assurances of their friendly disposition, and of their earnest desire to cultivate with me the relations of peace and amity.
"Gentlemen of the House of Commons;
"The estimates for the present year will be laid before you.
"They, have been framed upon principles of strict economy; but it is to me matter of the deepest regret that the state of the country has not allowed me to dispense with those additions to our military force which announced at the commencement of the last session of parliament.
"The first object to which your attention will be directed is the provision to be made for the support of the civil go-
12
"I leave entirely at your disposal my interest in the hereditary revenues: and I cannot deny myself the gratification of declaring, that so far from desiring any arrangement which might lead to the imposition of new burthens upon my people, or even might diminish, on my account, the amount of the reductions incident to my accession to the throne, I can have no wish, under circumstances like the present, that any addition whatever should be made to the Settlement adopted by parliament in the year 1816.
"My Lords and Gentlemen;
"Deeply as I regret that the machinations and designs of the disaffected should have led, in some parts of the country, to acts of open violence and insurrection, I cannot but express my satisfaction at the promptitude with which those attempts have been suppressed by the vigilance and activity of the magistrates, and by the zealous cooperation of all those of my subjects whose exertions have been called forth to support the authority of the laws.
"The wisdom and firmness manifested by the late parliament, and the due execution of the laws, have greatly contributed to restore confidence throughout the kingdom; and to discountenance those principles of sedition and irreligion which had been disseminated with such malignant perseverance, and had poisoned the minds of the ignorant and unwary.
"I rely upon the continued support of parliament in my determination to maintain, by all the means intrusted to my hands, the public safety and tranquillity.
"Deploring, as we all must, the distress which still unhappily prevails among many of the labouring classes of the community, and anxiously looking forward to its removal or mitigation, it is in the mean time our common duty, effectually to protect the loyal, the peaceable, and the industrious, against
13
"I trust that an awakened sense of the dangers which they have incurred, and of the arts which have been employed to seduce them, will bring back by far the greater part of those who have been unhappily led astray, and will revive in them that spirit of loyalty, that due submission to the laws, and that attachment to the constitution, which subsist unabated in the hearts of the great body of the people, and which, under the blessing of Divine Providence, have secured to the British nation the enjoyment of a larger share of practical freedom, as well as of prosperity and happiness, than have fallen to the lot of any nation in the world."
His majesty then retired, and the Commons returned to their House.
ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH AT THE OPENING OF THE SESSION.]
His majesty's most gracious speech having been again read by the lord chancellor, and also by the reading clerk at the table,
Lord Viscount Granville
rose to move an address of thanks. The noble lord said, that being of late not much accustomed to public speaking, he felt considerable embarrassment in addressing their lordships on the present occasion, and that embarrassment could not fail to be increased when he considered how many noble lords there were now around him who were far better qualified than himself to do justice to the task he had undertaken; but it was at the same time highly satisfactory to him, while performing this duty, to reflect, that the speech which had, on this important occasion, been delivered from the throne, was one the language of which was of a nature almost to preclude discussion; and that the sentiments of the address he was about to move, were such as must necessarily command the general, he might say the unanimous, concurrence of their lordships. This consideration was more peculiarly satisfactory at the present moment, for there never was a period when it was of so much import-
14
15
16
17
Lord Howard
of Effingham rose to second it. The noble lord alluded particularly to that part of the speech which related to the distress of the country, and the necessity of protecting the loyal and peaceable against the effect of those principles of sedition and irreligion which led to riot and disturbance, by taking advantage of the irritation which that distress created. It was not strange, he said, that severe distress should be felt, when the fluctuation of our commerce and industry were considered. At one time we had nearly the commerce of the world, and our population was fully employed in branches of industry, either for the supply of domestic or foreign demand. Now that commerce was much reduced by being shared among other nations, and our manufacturers aid artisans were thrown out of work. They were consequently reduced to a state of poverty, and became an easy prey; to the arts of the designing and the wicked. But, from whatever cause disaffection arose,
18
Earl Grosvenor
said, that in speeches from the throne, at the commencement of a new session of parliament, it was generally thought proper to include a view of the system which ministers meant to pursue for the year; and it was a general practice, in those opposed to them, to enter into a discussion or consideration of all the topics so introduced. But on such an occasion as the present, at the commencement of a new reign—when his majesty had been in the House for the first time since his accession—when he had addressed to their lordships his first speech—it was desirable to avoid the introduction or the discussion of any subjects which might lead to a difference of opinion. Although, therefore, he felt, that at other times it was proper to discuss the topics of speeches from the throne, to whatever difference of opinion they might lead, he was glad that such a course was not necessary now. It was in every respect, to be wished that the first address to the throne from the first parliament of his majesty's reign should be adopted unanimously; and, to be Unanimous, it was desirable that no discussion should be provoked on subjects likely to create
19
The Marquis of Lansdowne
said, that he looked with sincere satisfaction to the course which had been pursued, and the result to which their lordships were likely to come. For, whether he considered
20
21
22
23
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he hoped their lordships would excuse him if he trespassed on their attention for a short time. After the manner in which the address had been moved by his noble friend—after the speech in which it had been seconded; and after the manner in which the two noble lords opposite had concurred in the address, he trusted he should not be considered as rising on this occasion to detain them for more than a few moments. He could assure their lordships it was not his intention to bring before them any topic which could create a difference of opinion, or which could tend to prevent that unanimity so desirable at the present moment. That unanimity must be desirable to their lordships, from every circumstance connected with the business of the day. This was the first occasion that they had met their sovereign in that House, and it was most desirable that their lordships should be unanimous in going up to him with an address of thanks for his most gracious speech. But when they looked at the tenour of that speech—when they viewed that part where the illustrious individual was personally concerned—he was satisfied they would take that opportunity of going up with the address with unanimity and gratitude for the gracious sentiments which he had expressed. The noble lord who moved the address had well said, that his majesty had that day given a proof of magnanimous disinterestedness in everything which concerned himself. This was important in itself, as it was calculated to rivet him in the affections of his people; it was important, as it afforded an excellent example to those who were under him—and it was important, as it showed
24
25
26
Lord Holland
said, he was very unwilling to detain their lordships at the present moment, and in the few observations which he should offer he would abstain from every topic which might tend to disturb the unanimity of the House; but if he concurred, as he was certainly disposed to do, in this address, he must not be supposed to pay any compliment to the wisdom and energy of the last parliament, or to retract any thing which had been said on certain subjects by noble lords on his side of the House. He conceived that some of the last acts of the late parliament had been productive of nothing but mischief; and, if there was any improvenent visible in the country since then, which he hoped might be found to be the case, it was by no means to be attributed to the operation of those acts. With these reservations he would support the motion.
The address was then put, and carried
nem. diss.
PETITION OF THE REV. MR. JONES.]
Lord Holland
gave notice, that he would take an early opportunity of presenting a petition to the House, affecting in an especial manner the interests of the beneficed clergy. It related, too, very particularly to three right reverend lords if the House. He should be happy to hear from any of the learned prelates, when it would be convenient for them to attend to the subject.
The Bishop of Exeter
said, that any time would be equally convenient to him. Lord Holland accordingly fixed upon to-morrow se'nnight; and their lordships were ordered to be summoned.
HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Thursday, April 27, 1820.
ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH AT THE OPENING OF THE SESSION.]
27
The Speaker acquainted the House that that House had been in the House of Peers, where His Majesty had delivered a most gracious Speech to both Houses of Parliament, and of which, to prevent mistakes, he had obtained a copy. [See p. 11.] After the Speaker had read the Speech,
Sir Edward Knatchbull
rose. He said, he should take the liberty of directing the attention of the House to the gracious speech which they had heard, for the purpose of proposing such an address to his majesty as should accord with their feelings of loyalty, and their affectionate regret for the loss of his late majesty; and therefore he hoped, such an address as would be unanimously sanctioned by both sides of the House. In discharging this duty he should have occasion to refer to various topics, and he felt that his best claim to the indulgence of the House would be the assurance that he should not encroach at any great length on their attention. On the present occasion he felt particularly anxious that the address which he was about to propose should be adopted by an unanimous vote of the House. The recent accession of his majesty, and this being the first opportunity he had had of meeting his parliament, were, in his mind, grounds of very considerable weight; and, in the present situation of the country, an address from parliament in favour of its established government was of material importance. When he spoke of the government of the country, he of course did not mean the persons by whom the functions of government were discharged, but the constitution of the country itself. In the address which he was about to submit to the consideration of the House, nothing of a political nature would be found to militate against the attainment of that unanimity which was so desirable. On looking forward to the course which ministers might be about to adopt, he meant not to pledge himself, much less the House, if it should agree to this address, to support any particular measures. He could, with great truth, state to the House, that if, in moving this address, he had considered that lie was compromising the principle of any measure that might be afterwards brought forward, he would not have been found to discharge that duty. Before he proceeded to the consideration of the principal points in the speech which they had heard read, it would not be right if he did not
28
29
30
31
32
33
Mr. Wilmot
rose to second the address, and said, that he did not yield to the hon. mover in the earnest hope which he had expressed, that the House would unanimously agree to the address; and he trusted that no expression would fall from him which could in any degree tend to provoke discussion, or interrupt the unanimity of the House. He would avoid the introduction of any topics which might more properly come under the subsequent consideration of the House; but there was one topic on which he could anticipate the unanimous feelings of the House—he meant the demise of our late venerable sovereign. Looking at the period of his accession to the throne in the prime of life and the pride of hope, and contrasting it with the mournful close of his life, when confined within the precincts of his palace, and bereft of that sense which might have mitigated his afflictions, he was shut out from almost all the consolations which this life affords. Whatever difference of opinion might exist as to the policy of the measures pursued during his reign, every feeling of irritation must subside at the contemplation of so awful an instance of the instability of human grandeur. The recollection of the paternal solicitude with which he uniformly watched over the interests of the. people, would secure to his memory the lasting gratitude of the country. His reign, one of the longest in our annals, was distinguished by an event so prominent, as almost to monopolize our attention;—he alluded to the French revolution, an event which might justly be considered as one of the most extraordinary in the history of nations, whether we regarded its origin, its continuance or its termination. It had terminated in a military despotism, which threatened to overwhelm the whole civilised world, but which had been, at length, triumphantly
34
35
36
Mr. Tierney
said, he was not disposed to quarreh with a great deal that had fallen from the hon. mover and seconder; on the contrary, he agreed with them entirely upon some points; and if at all times he felt it unnecessary to bring forward matter of difference where none was offered on the other side, he should be peculiarly unwilling to do so on the present occasion, when the first speech of a new sovereign was before the House. The fair, cool, and temperate tone of the hon. gentlemen who had just taken their seats, formed another inducement for him not to express any dissent; or, supposing the. speech from the throne had contained any particular phrase, ambiguous or liable to misconstruction, what they had said on the various points would probably have rendered explanation needless. He congratulated the House on the prevailing unanimity; he hoped it was an earnest of the future, and that all parties in the House would unite in the expression of unshaken loyalty to the Crown, and of a firm determination, while the true liberties of the people were supported, to set themselves honestly and steadily against those machinations alike directed against the happiness and security of the sovereign and his subjects. In that direction he would go as far as any man; and beyond that, happily, on the present occasion, it was not necessary to say more. He therefore again congratulated the House on the favourable auspices under which the new session was commenced.
Sir Francis Burdett
said, that he should be very sorry if he were supposed capable of showing any disrespect to the throne, by disturbing the unanimity so desirable on the present occasion. He should certainty be reluctant to do so for the reasons already stated; but he could not at the same time avoid observing, that for some few years past the House had been placed in rather an awkward and disagreeable predicament with regard to the speeches from the throne, Formerly it was expected that they should be a full and fair statement of the whole situation of the country, instead of being frittered away, as at present, into mere matters of form and compliment, in which gentlemen might or might not concur according to the state of their own feelings, and the respect which all ought to feel towards the person of the sovereign, but a non-concurrence in which need not be intruded upon the House when all questions
37
38
The Address was agreed to
nem.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, April 28, 1820.
THE MARQUIS OF HASTINGS'S ANSWER TO THE VOTE OF THANKS.]
The Speaker informed the House that he had received a letter, dated Calcutta, October 6, 1819, from the marquis of Hastings, which, with the permission of the House, he would then read.
"Sir; "
Calcutta, Oct.
"I have to acknowledge the honour of your letter, conveying to me the high distinction of thanks from the House of Commons on the issue of the campaign in Central India.—So proud a reward is very gratefully received by me, although the terms confine the approbation to my military management. I would fain assure myself the honourable House could not but be satisfied that the endeavour to extinguish the Pindarries was imposed on this government by the most direct necessity; that the contest with the Mahrattas, though guarded against as a risk involved in the other undertaking, was altogether unsought by us, and that the events distinctly prove there could have been no previous plan for extending the honourable Company's territories in deviation from the expressed judgment of the legislature.—Sensible as I should still have been to the generosity of the House of Commons in discriminating and noticing favourably my professional exertions, I could secretly have cherished little pride in the honour, had I felt myself open to the imputation of having wilfully entailed war by indulging a perverse or illicit policy: but I most respectfully venture to rest upon the opinion of the honourable House as to my not having forgotten, in a case of exigency, the spirit of the rules prescribed to me, and what was due to the character of my country—I have notified to lieut. general sir Thomas Hislop, to the other general officers, and to the
39
BOROUGH OF GRAMPOUND.]
Lord John Russell
gave notice of a motion for leave to bring in a bill to disfranchise the borough or Grampound, and to transfer the elective franchise to the borough of Leeds. He also begged leave to say, that in the course of the session he intended to submit to the House a motion for shortening the duration of sir M. Lopez's imprisonment.
EDUCATION OF THE POOR.]
Mr. Brougham
gave notice, that, at an early period after the Whitsuntide holydays, he should submit a motion relative to the education of the poor. Although he was aware that it was irregular to enter in to any explanation on rising merely to give a notice, yet he trusted the House would allow him to observe, that the delay which had already occurred was owing to anything rather than to his being less sensible than formerly of the importance of education. On the contrary, the events which had lately occurred had rather strengthened his conviction of the indispensable necessity of imparting education to the poor. One cause of the delay which had taken place was, that the Education Digest, on which the measures which he should have to propose would be founded, could not be sooner prepared; and it was desirable that it should be in the hands of members before the question was brought under discussion. Another reason for his not fixing an earlier period was, that the discussion of the civil list, incident to the commencement of a reign, would occupy the attention of the House for a considerable time, and it, was desirable that the discussions on these two subjects should be kept separate. Longer, however, than till after the holydays, he could not consent to postpone the consideration of this important question.
CATHOLIC QUESTION.]
Sir H. Par-
40
rose to give notice, that on Thursday, the 11th of May, his right hon. friend, the member for Dublin (Mr. Grattan), would submit to the House a motion for the removal of the disabilities which the law at present imposed on his majesty's Roman Catholic subjects.
REFORM IN PARLIAMENT.]
Mr. Lambton
rose to renew the notice which he had given in the last session of parliament of his intention to bring before the House the present state of the representation; and he now gave notice that he should submit a motion on that subject on Tuesday the 6th of June. As far as he could judge, that arrangement would not interfere with the other business of the House.
SCOTCH REPRESENTATION.]
Lord A. Hamilton
gave notice, that he meant to bring before the House the question of the Scotch representation; and, to keep clear of the time just fixed on by his hon. friend, he should bring forward his motion on the 24th of May. He also gave notice, that on Thursday next he should move for the revival of the committee on the Scotch burghs.
ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH AT THE OPENING OF THE SESSION.]
Sir E. Knatchbull
brought up the report of the Address on the King's Speech. Upon the motion, that it be read a second time,
Lord A. Hamilton
said, that it was not his intention to trouble the House at any length, but he could not allow the present opportunity to pass without impressing on the minds of the right hon. gentlemen opposite the necessity of attending to the distress of that part of the country with which he was connected. When the House recollected that fourteen or fifteen weeks ago the commerce and manufactures of the country had been represented to be in a most flourishing condition, and when they compared that declaration with the statements in the Speech delivered yesterday from the throne, they must all be struck with the sudden change which had taken place in the aspect of the country; and he, for one, should not think that he discharged his duty conscientiously, if he did not on the present occasion suggest what he conceived might be applied in mitigation of the evil. They would all remember that a sum of 50,000
l.
41
42
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
stated, in reply to the questions of the noble lord, that the expense already incurred considerably exceeded the 50,000
l.
43
Mr. Finlay
agreed with what had been stated by his noble friend respecting the distressed state of the country; and when the right hon. gentleman stated that only 5,000 persons had gone to the Cape of Good Hope, the House would see that by the regulations adopted it had been impossible for the distressed population to relieve themselves. It was impossible for them to pay any sum of money, however small; and therefore, if the means of emigration were not granted unconditionally, and as a boon, he feared they could not avail themselves of the opportunity afforded. He believed his noble friend was in possession of many communications, as he himself was, from persons who, though perfectly willing to emigrate, could not transport themselves, being destitute of all means whatever. He was confident that the subject required only to be brought forward by government in such a practical manner as to engage attention, and that a sum of money, comparatively small, would be productive of great benefit, since those who were removed would not only be relieved themselves, but would relieve those to whom they were at present a burthen.
The Address was agreed to
nem.
DROITS OF THE CROWN AND PRIVY PURSE.]
Mr. Tierney
said, he could not help observing, that the papers before the House seemed to be all very clear, with the exception of the sum of 385,000
l.
l.
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that it had been from time to time the practice of parliament, that certain monies, arising from particular colonial funds, should be added to the privy purse. But the right hon. gentleman would see,
44
l.,
l.
Mr. Tierney
knew that the allowance of 60,000
l.
l.,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that such had been the immemorial usage.
Mr. Tierney
wished to know, whether they were to understand that the funds of the Crown might be enlarged in this manner by his majesty's ministers? If not, how did it happen that this 6,000
l.
l.,
l.
Mr. Hume
was very anxious to know what the colonial funds in question were.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that it was impossible to give a specific account of such appropriations, occurring in the earlier years of so extended a reign, although it might be in his power to show in what manner they had been made during the latter part of it.
Mr. Tierney
said, that the excess of 385,000
l.,
Mr. Brougham
said, that upon the subject of the civil list it might be matter of convenience to the House to understand when it would be brought forward. He deeply regretted that it was one which was not to remain in the hands of hon. gentlemen opposite. He did hope that those hon. gentlemen would have submitted the matter to the consideration of
45
non constat
pro tanto,
REVENUES OF THE CROWN.]
The following account was laid on the table of the House by his Majesty's command.
An account of the total produce of all Funds at the disposal of the Crown, and usually deemed not to be under the immediate control of Parliament, since the accession of his late majesty; distinguishing the monies arising from droits of the admiralty, and droits of the Crown; 4£ per cent West-India duties; Scotch revenue; and from all other sources not hereinbefore specified; so far as the same can be ascertained.
An account of the droits of
£
s.
d.
the Admiralty and droits of the Crown, from 1760 to 1820
9,562,614
4
6½
The application of this sum in rewards to captors, and payments to claimants, and in aid of the public service, and of the civil list, and for other purposes, is to be found in the accounts which have from time to time been laid before Parliament.
An account of the four and half per cent West-India
46
duties, from 1760, to 1820.
2,116,484
0
0
This revenue is charged with the salaries of the governors and various, other public officers connected with the West Indies, and also with the payment of pensions granted by the Crown; as appears in the accounts laid from time to time before Parliament.
* An account of the surplus of Gibraltar, revenues, remitted to England from 1760 to 1820, after discharging garrison expenses
124,256
10
7
* An account of the surplus of Scotch Civil List, from 1760 to 1820, now appropriated as it may arise, under the act 50 Geo. 3rd, c. 3. in aid of the Civil List in England
207,700
0
0
* An account of the Escheats to his majesty in cases of illegitimacy or otherwise, from 1760 to
214,647
15
0
* An account of the Escheats to his majesty, being the property of Alien enemies, from 1760
108,777
17
8
* An account of the funds arising by sale of lands in the French West India islands, ceded at the peace
106,300
0
0
* An account of the revenues arising from the islands of Minorca, Martinique, St. Croix, and St. Thomas, and from the settlement of Surinam, while the same were in the possession of his majesty
150,816
0
7
* An account of the casual revenues arising from quit rents, &c. in the British colonies, and from all other sources not before enumerated, from 1760 to1820
104,865
3
2½
£12,705,461
11
7
*The whole of these sums have been appropriated at various times in discharge of the debts of the civil list, and to other public purposes, as will appear by the reports and accounts laid before parliament; with the exception of 385,000
l.,
47
CHARLES ARBUTHNOT.
Whitehall, Treasury Chambers,
April, 28, 1820.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, May 1, 1820.
THE KING'S ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.]
The Speaker reported his Majesty's Answer to the Address, as follows:
"Gentlemen; I return you my warmest thanks for this loyal and dutiful address. It gives me the utmost satisfaction to receive these assurances of your veneration for the memory of my beloved father, and of your attachment to my person and government, on this first occasion of my meeting you in parliament since my accession to the throne; and I shall rely with confidence on your support in my endeavours to promote the welfare of all classes of my people, as affording, under the blessing of Divine Providence, the surest pledge of a prosperous and happy reign."
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he had searched the Journals of the House, and had found two precedents in former reigns wherein it had been the practice of the House to return thanks for the royal answer to the address presented to the throne by the first parliament of a new reign; therefore as hon. gentlemen had now heard read from the chair the most gracious answer of his present majesty, he should move "that an humble address be presented to his majesty returning the most humble thanks of this House for his most gracious answer to the address; and that such address be presented to his majesty by such members of this House as were members of his majesty's privy council."—The motion was agreed to.
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.]
Mr. H. Sumner
adverted to the great inconveniences under which the county of Surrey laboured, owing to the varying and uncertain state of weights and measures. He said that the city of London had formerly felt the great inconvenience and disadvantage of a similar state of things, and conceived that, acting under their own authority, they were capable of subdividing the standard measure in the Exchequer, and and of making those subdivisions the standards of weights and measures within their jurisdiction. Now, the county of
48
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
was not entirely prepared to answer the question of the hon. gentleman. The subject was one which had long occupied the attention of his majesty's ministers. He was quite aware of its importance, but he apprehended that no general meausre could be brought in during the present session; some preliminary steps, however, might be taken.
COURTS OF JUSTICE IN SCOTLAND.]
Mr. H. Clive
laid on the table a number of papers and reports connected with the commission to inquire into the receipt of fees, &c. in the courts of justice in Scotland. He moved they should be printed.
Lord A. Hamilton
begged to be informed whether it was true that a new appointment had taken place, or was about
49
The Lord Advocate
replied, that the appointment had already taken place several weeks ago.
Lord A. Hamilton,
after this information, should feel it his duty to bring the subject before the House; but at present he was not prepared to say whether he should do so by moving for a copy of the appointment, or for a vote of censure upon the adviser of such an appointment.
The Lord Advocate
had no doubt but that he should be able to satisfy the House of the propriety of any measure of this sort which had been adopted, whenever the period arrived for its discussion.
Sir John Newport
was exceedingly anxious that his noble friend should bring this motion under discussion, either by moving for a copy of the appointment, or by any other mode of proceeding which he might think proper. He greatly lamented that not one step had yet been taken to realize the suggestions of many of the most intelligent members of that committee.
Mr. Brougham
wished to ask the learned lord one question about the filling up of an appointment. The learned lord had once in his place remarked, that some officers of the jury-courts of Scotland being thought necessary, their appointments could not be filled up until parliament met. In consequence, however, of their having discovered a very gross transaction, which he would not characterize in the language that it deserved, it appeared otherwise. Had an additional number of judges of the jury-courts been really appointed? For the transaction he spoke of was really one of the most outrageous and gross jobs that ever had been done.
The Lord Advocate
was not cognizant of the particular transaction to which the learned gentleman alluded; but it was in consequence of express representations that the business of the judges of the jury-courts had so much increased, that their office could not be carried on without an addition to their number that that addition had been made.
50
Mr. Brougham
was not at all surprised that the judges of the jury-court, as parties in the case, should have recommended the addition; and he grieved that an hon. and learned friend of his was at that time a member of that very court. He pledged himself, however, to prove, that a grosser job, a more palpable job, or one more outrageous to the feelings of a burthened public, had never been transacted, even in Scotland.
Lord A. Hamilton
then gave notice, that he should move for a copy of the appointment on the 11th of May.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, May 2, 1820.
STEAM ENGINES AND FURNACES.]
Mr. M. A. Taylor
said, it was in the recollection of many members, that during the session preceding the last, he had moved for a committee to inquire into the practicability of erecting steam engines and furnaces in such a manner as to relieve the places in which they were erected from the intolerable nuisance which their intense smoke had so generally produced to the health and comfort of the population of large cities and towns. That committee had been granted to him, and their report was in the possession of the House. If gentlemen would take the trouble of attending to its suggestions, they would find substantial reasons to be satisfied that such a very desirable improvement could be both easily and promptly effected. From, the manner in which these furnaces were erected, and increased as they were in number, London, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, and other extensive cities and towns, were almost become uninhabitable [a laugh]. Gentlemen might laugh at the term, but he contended it was strictly true, as the persons engaged in business in these towns were actually compelled to guard the health of their families from the deleterious effects of the ebullitions of smoke issuing from those furnaces, by removing to hired houses at a distance from the place of their avocations. The whole of these dense ebullitions of smoke, which made the air of large places so unhealthy, and propagated fever and disease, principally arose from the furnaces as they were at present constructed. That such an evil could be corrected, and corrected without injury to the persons engaged in business connected with these steam engines, he was cer
51
52
Mr. Denman
seconded the motion, and bore his fullest testimony to the facts stated by his hon. friend, as to Mr. Parkes's manufactory at Warwick. He had seen three furnaces at work, and not the slightest appearance of smoke. He had no doubt that the public knowledge of the thing would of itself be sufficient to introduce the improvement into general practice, without the necessity of recourse to a declaratory law. He paid a high compliment to Mr. Parkes, for the merit of this important invention, which was remarkable for its simplicity. Of its successful result the public would soon have an opportunity of judging, by means of its introduction into the brewery of Messrs. Barclay and Co., and into other establishments in the metropolis. The country, he said, was much indebted to his hon. friend for bringing such questions before the legislature.
Sir C. Mordaunt
had also seen the manufactory of Mr. Parkes, and had admired the ingenious and at the same time effectual method in which the desirable object was accomplished. It would, he was satisfied, be generally adopted as soon as it was generally known.
Mr. Mills
from his own personal observation, confirmed all that had been said in favour of the invention of Mr.
53
The motion was then agreed to.
STAGE COACH DRIVERS.]
Mr. M. A. Taylor
said, that the subject to which he had now to draw the attention of the House was one of serious importance. The House was no doubt aware, that, excepting in cases where death ensued, under the present law, a stage-coachman who drove furiously, to the imminent; hazard of life and limb, could scarcely be punished at all; where a coach was over-turned, and the passengers were so injured that death was the ultimate consequence, the punishment upon the proprietors was only a fine of 10
l.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS BILL.]
Lord Althorp
moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend the Insolvent Debtors act. In the present stage he should only advert to two leading distinctions from the present bill which he intended to introduce; the first was, to empower commissioners out of court to inquire into the affairs of the debtor: and the second was, to grant creditors the power of compelling reluctant debtors, when imprisoned, to be released by the act.
Mr. Lockhart
wished that the subject should be treated upon as extended a basis as possible, and that provision should be made against a class of prisoners who had formerly taken the benefit of the act, though it was not intended for their relief; he meant those who were confined in consequence of actions for damages, having
54
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
CATO STREET CONSPIRACY—GEORGE EDWARDS.]
Mr. Alderman Wood
said, that the question which he now thought it his duty to bring under the consideration of the House was one of the greatest importance, and particularly to the House itself. He might be wrong in the course which he had proposed to himself to pursue; but if he was, the Speaker would no doubt instruct him what was the proper mode of bringing the matter forward. He repeated that he considered it as one in which the House was most deeply concerned. He had come to the determination of treating it as a breach of privilege; and would here very briefly state what were the facts. Seven persons had recently applied to him, in his official capacity of magistrate, for a warrant to take up a man stated to be then resident in Fleet-street, whose name was said to be George Edwards. He immediately went into a private examination of those individuals, with the assistance of a most able and worthy brother magistrate (sir W. Domville). Four of the parties deposed to some very material facts, some of which, affecting the safety of that House, he should now mention; but others, which were detailed at great length, were of too horrible a description for him to repeat. They involved a plot, not merely to effect the destruction of that House, and the hon. members within it, but of one of the highest personages in this kingdom, and
55
clean."
56
57
Mr. Bathurst
observed, that the only question for the House to determine was, whether that which had been stated by the worthy alderman called upon them to take up the matter as a breach of privilege. The motion did not require any other reference to the circumstances which had been described by the worthy alderman than this—could those circumstances be construed into a breach of privilege? Now really he besought the House to consider what sort of precedent they would establish, if they acquiesced in the worthy alderman's motion. Here was a man, who, according to the worthy alderman, was an accomplice, or rather a principal, in the conspiracy for which several unfortunate persons had lately forfeited their lives. According to the worthy alderman, that man was deeply implicated in the crime for which those persons had suffered and if the motion was agreed to, he would be called to the bar to be examined on a charge of having committed a breach of privilege, when, if the allegations of the worthy alderman were borne out by the fact, he would be found to have committed an overt act of treason. If any other course could be adopted in which the case might be fairly investigated, he would concur in it; but if the worthy alderman really believed that the individual in question had projected the attempt against that House which had been described, he would recommend the worthy alderman to withdraw a motion for calling that individual to the bar, in the supposition that he would there charge himself with such an offence.
58
Mr. Alderman Wood
said, he certainly set out with intimating that he saw great difficulties in this question; and from his inexperience in that House it was naturally to be expected that he should feel that uncertainty, in a case of this kind, which those of greater parliamentary knowledge would not experience. He was, indeed, quite happy to hear the right hon. gentleman observe, that if the business were brought before the House properly, the House would properly entertain it. He thought it right to state that he had applied to another quarter, to get the individual in question prosecuted, but in that application he had been disappointed [Hear, hear!]]. He had already stated, that he did not think proper to read the answer which he had received when he had felt it his duty to carry the evidence which had been submitted to him, to the office of the home department. He was certainly not satisfied with that determination. Several of the deponents were persons not at all implicated in the late transactions; and their evidence was, in his opinion, fully sufficient to convict the person in question. Still, however, he had been told in another quarter, that it was not so, although the depositions contained matter, which, of course, he had not communicated to the House, but which would make them shudder if the heard it. The impression on his mind certainly was, that the accused person should be taken up. He took it for granted that the gentlemen opposite knew where that person was to be found, and that he could not escape. Having him in their possession—having it in their power to bring him forward, he thought they ought immediately to do so. Edwards was charged with being the sole promoter of the treasonable conspiracy which had been formed. It was declared to be his practice to lay hold of all the desperate characters whom he could find, and to bring them into his diabolical practices. He thought he could safely pledge himself to prove by indisputable evidence that Edwards was the sole plotter and founder of the Cato-street conspiracy. He had discharged his duty by bringing the subject under the consideration of the House. After what had fallen from the right hon. gentleman, he should certainly be disposed to withdraw his motion, although he was not prepared to propose any other course of proceeding
Mr. Hume,
as he understood from the
59
Mr. Brougham
confessed that he wished the worthy alderman would take the advice of the right hon. gentleman rather than that of his hon. friend; and that he would withdraw his motion. But he begged to be by no means understood to join in the expression of levity, which, very much to his surprise and pain, had been drawn from some hon. members by the grave and extraordinary statements which had been made—statements which, in his opinion, were not at all of a character to provoke laughter. He was certainly not disposed to say that the present was precisely an occasion on which it was fitting for the House to resort to the law of privilege; but at the same time, if the
60
61
62
Mr. Canning
said, that whatever might be the ultimate decision of the House on the subject, whether they would determine on entering into the investigation of it or not, there was one point on which all must agree, namely the inutility of discussing it at a time, and on a question, the decision of which could lead to no satisfactory result. The hon. and learned gentleman seemed to have collected what he was sure the House had not, namely, that there was a disposition on the part of some honourable members to treat the whole affair with levity and ridicule. Really he had not seen any such disposition. He was sure that no such disposition had been manifested, either by himself or his honourable friends about him. As little Could he plead guilty to the other charge, of a pre-disposition to accuse the hon. and learned gentleman of joining the popular cry against informers—a subject on which the hon. and learned gentleman had just made the most just and manly observations. He could assure the hon. and learned gentleman, that he never entertained such a pre-disposition; and if he had, it must have been entirely removed by the hon. and learned gentleman's candid statement of his opinion. On that statement, without wishing to add a single word to it, he was perfectly content to rest the defence, not only of the present or of any particular government, but of all governments that had ever existed in this or in any other civilized country, for taking the means which circumstances rendered necessary, to defeat
63
Mr. Alderman Wood
expressed his willingness to withdraw the motion. He begged, however, to say, that he thought in the mariner in which he introduced it, he had avoided any thing justly exceptionable. He had abstained from reading the deposition, for he should be sorry that the dreadful allegations which it contained should at present go forth to the world; and he had therefore confined himself to a description of that part of it. which most nearly touched the House. At the present moment he was not prepared to bring the motion forward in another shape, but he thought he should do so in the course of a day or two, and that he should move for the appointment of a secret committee to investigate the case.
Mr. Canning
disclaimed any intention of imputing the slightest blame to the worthy alderman. He certainly disagreed with the worthy alderman as to the expediency of his motion, but he saw nothing whatever to criticise in the manner in which it had been brought forward.
The motion was then withdrawn.
CIVIL LIST.]
The House having resolved itself into a committee on the Civil List acts,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that he would, on this occasion, merely move a series of resolutions relative to the civil list, on the understanding which had previously taken place, that the question should be discussed on the bringing up of the report on Friday next. He then moved, "That it is the opinion of this committee, that for the support of his majesty's household, and of the honour and dignity of the crown, there be granted
64
l.
l.
Sir H. Parnell
was of opinion, that the sum now proposed was too large to permit the House to come to a vote on it at once, as a mere matter of course. He conceived, that, before they were called on to grant such a sum, papers should be laid before the House for their information. It appeared to him that they did not possess that extent of knowledge on this subject which would enable them, in considering the question, to do their duty to the country. They were directed, by the Speech from the throne, to provide for the civil government, and for his majesty's household. They were also informed that the state of the hereditary revenues was to be considered by parliament. Now it appeared to him, that they ought not to discuss those important matters of finance without full information. They ought to know, specifically, what the expenses of the civil government amounted to. That would afford an excellent opportunity to the House for carrying into effect that retrenchment which was necessary in the present state of the finances of the country. With respect to the household, it was improper, he thought, to continue a system, against which so many objections had been made by the highest authority. When he said this, he need only allude to the celebrated speech of Mr. Burke. As to the hereditary revenues, it was a grave matter of consideration by what mode those revenues could be made productive. There was a considerable expenditure incurred in their collection, and opinions had been stated by the committee of finance, that the House had an opportunity of making great savings under that head. Other matters ought also to be brought under the consideration of the House; for instance, the revenues derivable from the duchy of Lancaster and the principality of Wales. All these matters should be locked into before the House did any thing with reference to these particular resolutions. He knew not what papers might be necessary to enable him to take a just view of the subject; but, undoubtedly, a considerable number was
65
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, it was generally understood that, in the first instance, the resolutions would be agreed to without observation, leaving the discussion on them to a future period.—The number of members who had left the House clearly proved that this feeling generally prevailed.
Colonel Davies
fully understood, and so did the whole House, that the arrangement of the civil-list was to proceed on the basis of the act of 1816. That arrangement provided a sum of 1,063,000
l.
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that certain English allowances must be confirmed and continued; but still, after making the deductions alluded to by the hon. gentleman there would be a clear saving to the public, except so far as it might be deemed proper hereafter to make some alteration.
Colonel Davies
said, his having fallen into this error was an additional argument in favour of delay. It showed how unprepared members were on this subject, and, he trusted, therefore that ministers would not press it forward.
Mr. Canning
said, the general understanding of the House was, that these resolutions should pass without discussion, and that the debate should be taken on the report. He was aware, in strict argument, that there was nothing in this to bind gentlemen from considering the question; but if, on every occasion, the feeling and opinion of each individual in the House were to be taken on a point of this kind, there would be an end of courteous understanding and accommodation. He was sure the right hon. gentleman opposite would bear him out when he said that it was thought much more convenient not to take the debate in this stage of the proceeding. He was quite convinced that neither his right. hon. friend, nor any other person in the situation of a responsible minister, would offer, for permanent settlement, not a proposal of his own, but of those whom he had consulted, without giving a fair opportunity for the discussion of its merits. If there were gentlemen
66
Mr. Tierney
felt himself called on to draw the attention of the House to what had passed on a former occasion. He was the person who put certain questions to the chancellor of the exchequer. He asked, whether it was the right hon. gentleman's intention, previously to the introduction of the resolutions, to refer any papers to the House, as the ground-work of that which he meant to propose? The right hon. gentleman answered, that no such mode of proceeding was in contemplation, but that he meant at once to proceed by way of resolution, and by that means to point out to parliament the objects he had in view. He (Mr. T.) stated that it was a matter of great importance, and, therefore, he was desirous not to go to the detail unprepared. He, in consequence, suggested, that, when the resolutions were proposed, and the statement of the right hon. gentleman was laid before them, nothing should be done to provoke a debate, but that the House should merely be put in possession of the line which government intended to pursue-On this occasion, he confessed he felt disappointed that the right hon. gentleman had not declared the ground on which he meant to proceed, instead of proposing a resolution having for its object the application of a gross sum. In this state of things, no gentleman was bound to abstain from debating the question now; and he appealed to the other side of the House, as well as to his own, whether the understanding amounted to any thing more than he had stated. He regretted that the right hon. gentleman had not coupled his proposition with some statement of the grounds on which he meant to act. However, in agreeing to the resolution now, he did not consider himself bound to take any particular course at a future day. When that period arrived, it would be open to any gentleman to move an amendment, to the proposition of the chancellor of the exchequer. One question he would now ask. The civil list was, he understood, to be settled on the basis of the settlement of 1816. Were no other deductions to be made in the new arrangement but the sum applicable to the maintenance of the establishment at Windsor—the sum applicable to the privy
67
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the right hon. gentleman had accurately conceived the purport of the resolution before the House. It referred to the whole revenue granted in 1816, with the exception of the expense of the Windsor establishment, 60,000
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Tierney
asked, what became of the sum of 58,000
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the provision for her late majesty came from the consolidated fund, independent of the civil list.
Lord Archibald Hamilton
said, he was anxious to know what the views of ministers were on the whole subject, before he acted on a part of it, particularly on that part which he considered as by far the most critical. He spoke with reference to the queen. He wished to know in what proportion her majesty was to be provided for; he wished to know in what manner the gentlemen opposite meant to introduce that part of the civil list at all to their consideration. At that moment her income had wholly ceased, she had no subsistence. He did not mean to say any thing to promote premature discussion. He would not, at present, discuss so delicate a topic as that which he had glanced at, because it would be very embarrassing to him as well as to the House. At the same time, he feared that the course they were now pursuing would prevent him from introducing it at a future period. If he were called on to vote these resolutions to-day, and to debate them when the report was brought up, be might be told that that was the time for considering the details, and not for arguing on the merits and principles of the system. If, however, the whole subject would be open for discussion at a future period, lie had no objection to let the resolutions pass.
Mr. Canning
said, that undoubtedly the noble lord would find every point connected with the arrangement of this question open to discussion, not, only with reference to form, but to sense and un-
68
Lord A. Hamilton
expressed himself satisfied by this explanation.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, the provision for the queen might be charged on the consolidated fund, in the same way as had been done with respect to her late majesty.
Mr. Hume
did not approve of the plan now proposed. In 1815-16, when an inquiry into the civil list was called for, it was shut out, and they were then told that a time would occur when it would be proper to investigate the hereditary revenues, and those branches over which the House had no control. The House had therefore a right to take into consideration the state of the king's separate hereditary revenue; the revenue, for instance, derived from Scotland, which produced 80,000
l.
l.
69
l.
70
l.
l.
l.
71
Sir H. Parnell
thought, that as frequent opportunities ought to be given for discussing this subject, the report ought to be recommitted after the subject should have been debated. This was the only mode of doing justice to a question involving so many details. Great prejudice and injury to the public would arise from any other mode of proceeding. He certainly would have opposed the accommodation now acted upon, if he had been in the House when it was agreed to. Instead of considering this subject in a committee of the whole House, which the right hon. gentleman would not allow, all the papers and documents on the subject ought, in his opinion, to have been referred to a select committee.
Mr. Brougham
rose to put his hon. friend, the member for Aberdeen, right. There were other branches of revenue, besides the hereditary revenues of the Crown, which he wished to see accounted for. The hereditary revenues, his hon. friend must be aware, his majesty had been graciously pleased to give up to the consideration of parliament. But there were others, such as the Scotch revenue, which was indeed very small, that had been alluded to by him. He conceived, as to the accommodation, that it was only a parliamentary mode of introducing the resolutions into the House, in order to get them printed. He approved of the proposal of the hon. baronet to have the report recommitted, but he considered himself bound not to object to the mode of proceeding at present proposed.
72
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, May 3, 1820.
WOOL TAX.]
Mr. Stuart Worthy
presented a petition from the worsted manufacturers of Nottingham, against the duty imposed during die last parliament on the importation of Foreign Wool. The same feeling pervaded, he well knew, the West Riding of Yorkshire; but as the question would be most probably brought before the House in a definite shape for its repeal, all he would say at present was, that he considered the imposition of that duty as a most impolitic and cruel measure.
Lord Milton
said, that he also had a petition to present from the merchants, manufacturers, and others interested in the wool trade of Leeds and its neighbourhood, against the wool tax, and praying for its repeal. The character and respectability of the signatures to that petition were the best evidence of the pressure of the evil against which they petitioned. The petition had not originated at a public meeting, because the persons who were most solicitous to press the repeal of that impolitic duty, wished to avoid any course likely to increase the ferment and agitation which existed on this subject in the West Riding of Yorkshire. The tax of which they complained, was not only in contradiction of every principle of political economy, but was directly contrary to that fundamental system of policy which for years had prevailed in this country, and to the continuance of which the faith of parliament was pledged—pledged, he would say, by the immemorial policy of its government—a policy which every statesman who viewed the question would see was the unfailing source of wealth and power. When he reflected also that that duty was imposed on the raw material, the manufacture of which constituted the employment of a great population then suffering under the severest pressure of distress and penury, he must add, that such a measure was not alone impolitic, but cruel and unfeeling. He could moreover state, that as a measure of revenue, it had alto-
73
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that when the question was brought before the House in the definite manner to which allusion had been made, he was sure it would receive the fullest consideration. He had, however, in answer to the argument of the noble lord, who contended, that as a measure of revenue, it had wholly failed, to say, that it had not yet been fairly tried. It came partially into operation in October last, was only extended in January, while at the time there was a large stock of foreign wool in the market.
Ordered to lie on the table.
CIVIL LIST.]
Sir H. Parnell
rose, to move for certain papers connected with the Civil List, under a conviction that, if the subject were thoroughly examined, a considerable sum might be saved to the country. The present was the only opportunity of enforcing a strict inquiry, because the House was aware that, as soon as the bargain had been completed, the answer would be ready, that the matter was concluded, and that no farther investigation could be had. He was anxious that the report of 1815 should be laid upon the table, that all members might be put in possession of the nature of the settlement of the civil list in the year following: if it could be reprinted, it would be a still greater advantage, as it formed the basis of the present plan. In addition, he wished for papers to show what increase had been made to the civil
74
l
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that the greater part of the information required by the hon. baronet was already before the House in different shapes, but it could not be collected and copied without such a loss of time as would be extremely inconvenient on a measure of so much importance and urgency. For the purpose of economical reduction, he could not see why it was necessary to enter now into a full examination of the official establishments paid out of the civil list. Many other offices came under the head of civil contingencies, which were annually brought before parliament. As to the report of 1815, he thought there could be no difficulty in obtaining a sufficient number of copies of it to inform all who would be willing to go through its voluminous details, and he did not think it necessary to reprint it. He moved the previous question.
Mr. Tierney
said, that it would be impossible to come to a vote on the resolutions of the chancellor of the exchequer
75
Mr. Calcraft
hoped that the hon. baronet would not withdraw his motion, and give way, unless the chancellor of the exchequer would undertake that the report of 1815 should be reprinted. He believed it contained all the information required by this motion.
Sir H. Parnell
added, that he would not trouble the House to divide, if that report were reprinted.
Mr. Tierney
supposed, that the question would be set at rest before gentlemen had that report in their hands. They were to decide first, and have the report afterwards. Besides, he wished for additional information. He wanted to know what had been done since 1816.
The motion was then agreed to.
CIVIL LIST REVENUES.]
Mr. Hume
said, he was anxious to submit to the House a motion respecting the expenses of the Civil List; and, in the outset, he was able to state, that the objections which the chancellor of the exchequer had made to the proposition of the hon. baronet, would not at all apply to any one of the motions he meant to offer. The House, he was persuaded, from what he had observed this day, would be desirous to obtain all the information possible respecting the income which his late majesty possessed; not only with respect to what parliament granted as a civil list, but also with reference to other exclusive and reserved revenues. The House was aware that in the report now ordered to be printed there was a statement of the total receipts and expenditure of the civil list, from the accession of his late majesty to the month of January, 1815. The object of one of his motions was, to complete that return, and to produce what did not appear from any papers before the House—a return of the expenditure from the 5th of January, 1815, to the 5th of Ja-
76
l
l
l
l
77
78
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
opposed the motion. The documents called for could not, he said, be useful to the hon. gentleman for the object he had in view. The act of 1816 required that, if there was an additional charge on the civil list exceeding the estimate by the sum of 16,000
l.
79
Mr. Hume
called on the right hon. gentleman to point out where one account connected with the civil list receipts and expenditure since 1816 was to be found. He thought it was most unfair to refuse this information, since individuals would not, hereafter, be able to alter the arrangement, as they might now do, if they were in possession of those accounts. The system had been changed by two acts of parliament; but ministers did not always keep within the letter of those acts. According to the report of 1815, the sum of 3,747,000
l.
l.
l.
in limine,
Mr. Huskisson
said, that the right of calling on ministers, under all circumstances, to produce accounts which the hon. gentleman seemed to think existed, was a new doctrine in parliament. He could quote a very high authority on this subject, that of the late Mr. Fox, who had distinctly stated, that, unless the Crown came to parliament for assistance in aid of the civil list, gentlemen were not at liberty to call for an account of its application and expenditure. They had just been told that the estimate had not been exceeded since the last arrangement; and the hon. gentleman observed, that he did not know whether it had or not. A specific allowance had been granted for the support of the king's household; and in the event of an excess beyond that allowance to the amount of 16,000
l.
80
Mr. Tierney
admitted that where no application for assistance was made by the Crown, it was not customary to inquire into the civil list expenditure. The speech of the right hon. gentleman was, however, one of the most extraordinary he had ever heard, because he stated the case as if there was a civil list in existence—the question being, how to form a civil list? They were not now dealing with a civil list actually in being—they were called on,
de novo,
81
l.,
82
Lord John Russell
said, it seemed to be the intention of his majesty's ministers, at the commencement of a new reign, to take as a model in the arrangement of the civil list, the arrangement made five years ago, notwithstanding all the changes which had since taken place, and without consenting to any inquiry on the subject. That was certainly not his view of the way in which the House of Commons, at a time of such extreme pressure, ought to perform its duty to the country. He did not know whether the hon. gentleman's motion was that which was best calculated to obtain the desired information (although it appeared to him to be a very fair and proper one), but he was perfectly satisfied that the House of Commons would not do its duty, if it consented to any proposition for the permanent establishment of a civil list without any further inquiry.
Mr. Hume
said, that the right hon. gentleman had observed, that the division of the civil list, in different classes in 1816, had prevented any exceeding. He did not seem to recollect, that, in 1786, there were different classes, which did not prevent an excess. At that time, the expenditure exceeded the estimate by 124,000
l.
Lord Milton
declared, that he very much doubted if the present circumstances of the country were such as to justify the establishment of a permanent civil list In the present state of our currency, it was impossible for any man to say what was the real value of a pound sterling, or what alteration the execution of the measures agreed to by parliament last year might cause in that value. He would, therefore, almost say, that no permanent civil list establishment ought at present to be formed; but, at least, the House ought maturely to consider on what basis that establishment ought to be constructed. It was half a century since the subject
83
The House divided: Ayes. 60; Noes 113.
List of the Minority.
Althorp, viscount
Hill, lord A.
Burdett, sir F.
Haldimand, W.
Boughey, sir S.
Harbord, hon. Ed.
Benett, John
Kennedy, T. F.
Bury, viscount
Lamb, hon. Wm.
Bernal, Ralph
Langton, J. H.
Baring, sir Thos.
Macdonald, James
Barham, J. F.
Milton, viscount
Bright, Henry
Millbank, Mark
Barrett, S. M.
Martin, John
Calcraft, John
Newman, R. W.
Calcraft, J. H.
O'Grady, capt.
Calvert, N.
Powlett, hon. W.
Calvert, C.
Parnell, sir H.
Cavendish, Henry
Pym, Francis
Crompton, Sam.
Palmer, C. F.
Colburne, N. R.
Ridley, sir M. W.
Curwen, J. C.
Robinson, sir G.
Crawley, S.
Robarts, Abr.
Penman, Thos.
Robarts, George
Duncannon, vise.
Russell, lord John
Dundas, C. L.
Rowley, sir Wm.
Grenfell, Pascoe
Ricardo, David
Gordon, Robt.
Rumbold, C.
Graham, R. G.
Sefton, earl of
Guise, sir W. B.
Tierney, right hon. G.
Hornby, E.
Wyndham, W.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Wilson, sir Robt.
84
Wilson, Thos.
TELLERS.
Warre, J. Ashley
Hume, Jos.
Webbe, Ed.
Philips, G.
Wilkins, Walter
Mr. Hume
proceeded to make his second motion. He avowed that his intention was, that the details of the last year's expenditure should be laid on the table, in order that the absurdity of many of the items might be shown. Was it not fitting that the House, in the present distressed state of the country, should have every information on the subject, when among the items were such sums in the 7th class as 1,372
l.
l
Mr. Hume
said, he would not go on with the remaining motions of a similar nature which he held in his hand; he must, however, again state, that the accessible accounts on the subject took weeks and months to understand, although a single hour's labour on the part of the clerks would obviate that inconvenience. The motion which be was now about to make was of a very different nature. It was surely most important, when the House were called upon to vote a civil revenue to his majesty for the support of the royal household, that they should know what sums his majesty had at his disposal, over and above all parliamentary grants. The amount of the reserved hereditary revenue of the crown in Scotland, taken on the average of the la6t three-or four years, amounted to 110,000
l.
85
l.
l.
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer moved the previous question, which was put and carried.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, May 4, 1820.
PRICE OF SILVER.]
Lord King
rose to move for an account of the market Price of Silver, with the view of ascertaining whether it was not under the Mint price. He thought it very necessary that their Lordships attention should be directed to this subject; for if it should appear, as he believed would be found to be the case, that the market price of silver was less than the Mint price, that would be a proof that the currency was debased. The only rule for ascertaining this fact, was a comparison of the price of the precious metals; for a comparison with paper afforded no means of judging. It appeared that the Bank bought gold at the rate of about 3
l.
s.
d.
86
d.
CIVIL LIST.]
The Marquis of Lans-downe
wished to ask the noble lord opposite a question, in reference to the civil list establishment, which was likely soon to come under their lordships consideration. He should be glad to know whether it was the intention of the noble lord to propose the appointment of a committee to inquire into the state of that establishment, or to give any information to the House which might be thought necessary, before the question came under consideration.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he did not intend to move for any committee. As to information, the noble marquis was aware that when the civil list was settled in 1816, the accounts thought necessary at that time were laid before parliament. That information was still accessible to their lordships, and he thought it sufficient to enable their lordships to discuss the question which would come before them.
The Marquis of Lansdownne
reminded the noble earl of what had passed when this subject gave rise to considerable discussion some years ago. It had been then, and on other occasions when the question was adverted to, uniformly stated, that when a new reign should commence an opportunity would be afforded to parliament for a complete investigation of the state of the civil list. This he believed was distinctly stated by the minister who made the arrangement in 1816. He had undoubtedly heard with much satisfaction the declaration made on the part of the Crown on the first day of the session relative to the civil list; but that declaration did not relieve parliament from the duty of now fully considering the subject, in order to ascertain whether the difference in the state of the country, and other circumstances, did not render it necesary that a new arrangement should be made. He was, therefore, justified in calling for the reprinting of the accounts which had been laid before parliament in 1816, and
87
88
The Earl of Liverpool
had no objection to the reprinting of the accounts to which the motion referred; but, though he did not wish to enter into any discussion on the topics on which the noble marquis had touched, he thought that some things which had dropped from him called for a few observations. He wished, in the first place, to remark, that there was no precedent for the course of inquiry which the noble marquis was desirous of seeing adopted on the present occasion. If they looked back to the commencement of any former reign, they would find no instance of the settlement of the civil list being preceded by a committee of inquiry. It had been, on all such occasions, the practice of parliament to proceed to the consideration of the civil list without calling for any information. He was not then discussing whether this course, which had been followed by their ancestors, was right or wrong; all that he meant now to say, was, that such had been the practice. It ought, however, to be recollected, that their lordships had at present an advantage which had been possessed on no former occasion of this kind. They had obtained, not indeed with reference to a new reign, but to a settlement for the same illustrious person who was now on the throne, all necessary information on the details of the subject which was about to be brought under their consideration. The papers presented in 1816 would enable them to understand all the parts of the subject in a manner for which no opportunity had been afforded on any former occasion. When the question came to be discussed, it would therefore be perfectly competent to any noble lord to argue, on reference to the recorded information, that there ought to be a difference between the settlement for the new reign and that which had been made in 1816. If the noble marquis referred to that settlement, he would find that every thing had been done with respect
89
90
Lord King
wished that his noble friend had given notice of a motion on the subject of his question. He would have preferred that to the present motion; and if the question should be brought forward, he would vote for the appointment of a committee. It was true that the state of the civil list had been taken into consideration in 1816; but then it came before parliament in the shape of a vested interest. It was not a question of a settlement for the commencement of a reign, but for a regent, who administered the government in behalf of his majesty. With regard to the separation of the accounts, nothing could more strongly show the necessity of that separation, than the confusion which arose from some payments being charged, partly on the civil list and partly on other funds. The speaker of the House of Commons, for instance, received one half of the salary from the civil list, and the other half from the consolidated fund. He thought with his noble friend, that this separation was necessary for the proper dignity of the Crown; but inquiry into every branch of the question was peculiarly necessary at a time when the country was experiencing the deepest distress, and more especially when it was proposed that their lordships should renew the settlement of 1816—a period of most lavish expenditure, of great depreciation in the currency, and consequent high price. It would not be doing justice to the country to take the arrangement of that period as a rule for the expenditure of the civil list without inquiry. Among the heads which ought certainly to be separated from the civil list was the charge for allowances to foreign ambassadors, to which his noble friend had referred. The arrangement should be such as to create an inducement to economy on the part of the Crown. Were this done, the Crown, when too lavish under one head, would be obliged to economize under another. This, however, was not to be expected
91
The motion was then agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, May 4, 1820.
LONDON BRIDGE.]
Mr. S. Whitbread
presented a petition from the Middlesex watermen of the river Thames, complaining of the great insecurity of London Bridge, the danger that attended life and property, and the interruption it gave to the navigation of the river.
Sir W. Curtis,
admitted that after the presentation of the petition, some inquiry into the state of the bridge was necessary, although he believed it was not in the state of danger described.
Mr. F. Lewis
said, it was highly necessary either that the worthy baronet or some other member should bring the subject before the House, as unless something was promptly introduced a most serious damage would be done to the navigation of the river below the bridge.
Sir W. Curtis
said, he should consult with the trustees and other parties interested, and bring the subject subsequently under the consideration of parliament.
Mr. Alderman Wood
said, an inquiry had been going on for some time by the trustees; but he thought his hon. colleague had best leave the introduction of the subject of bringing it before parliament to one of the gentlemen who presented petitions against the present state of the bridge. As one of the trustees of the bridge in right of his corporate character, he declared himself quite prepared for inquiry.
Mr. Calvert
thought something that essentially affected the fact was kept out of
92
Mr. Alderman Wood
assured his hon. friend, that the city had no interest in the water-works, except a small rent, which they would not hesitate to give up.
Ordered to lie on the table.
WOOL TAX.]
Mr. T. Wilson
rose, for the purpose of presenting a petition from the manufacturers and merchants concerned in the wool trade of the city of London. Adverting to the duty which was imposed upon foreign wool in the course of last year, the hon. gentleman observed that it appeared to him, from the very first, a proceeding of an unwise and impolitic nature, considering that the manufacturing interest of this country was at that time involved in great distresses, and that a very large number of individuals were suffering under heavy difficulties and privations. He had always felt the truth of the maxim, that the imposition of a new duty upon the raw material was a measure never justifiable, except when the trade was in a flourishing condition. The resolutions which had been founded upon these considerations, and transmitted to his majesty's ministers, were such as, he thought, would make out a very strong case. It was evident that the great price of the raw article would enhance the price of the manufacture in proportion; whereas a fall, such as would be occasioned by the withdrawing of the duty, would enable us to meet the competition of foreign markets. It was very true, as had been stated, that a great number of merchants in the city had refused the order which was transmitted to England for the clothing of the Russian army. The more he had extended his observations, the more information he had been enabled to collect upon the subject, he was so much the more convinced that this tax must operate like a mill-stone round the neck of the manufacturer. He implored his majesty's ministers to consider the state of the country, the condition of the manufacturing classes; and to reflect with how much better grace it would come from them to repeal this tax in pity to
93
Mr. Baring
thought, that a more important subject could not be brought under the consideration of the House. He could not, entirely unconnected as he was with the wool-trade, or with persons embarked in that trade, allow the present opportunity to pass, without saying that he considered this most ancient and valuable manufacture to be in very imminent danger. It could hardly be expected of him to speak more particularly to the subject. He was not exactly prepared to say whether the manufactures of the country could or could not bear this duty of 6
d.
94
Mr. Wilson
said, that he intended to follow up the petition, according to the prayer contained in it, by calling the serious attention of the House to the subject. But he should let the petition rest at present, until the House was in possession of numerous others upon the same subject, which he expected would be forwarded from all parts of the country.
Ordered to he on the table.
ROYAL BURGHS OF SCOTLAND.]
Lord A. Hamilton
said, that having been given to understand that there would be no objection to his motion for the re-appointment of a select committee, to take into consideration the various petitions presented from the royal burghs of Scotland, praying for municipal reformation, he should abstain from offering any observations in support of his motion, taking it for granted that the House concurred in the propriety of the course he was adopting. The report of the last parliament was before the House, and he had only to refer to the information it contained, in order to prove the importance of the measure. If it happened that any hon. gentleman either from reading the report, or from any other cause, should offer any opposition to the motion, he then trusted he should be heard in reply, with the view as far as he was able, to remove the objections. He could assure the House, that the question had excited, and continued to excite, the greatest anxiety throughout that part of the country. Though the list of the committee which he had to propose was not exactly what he wished. As one name had been objected to by his majesty's ministers, yet he was determined to make no opposition to the alteration. The noble lord concluded with moving, that the petitions presented from the royal burghs of Scotland, in the years 1818–19–20, praying
95
Lord Binning
begged to bear his testimony to the very liberal spirit in which the noble lord met the suggestions of his majesty's government, as to the constitution of the committee.
The motion was then carried, and a select committee appointed.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER IN SCOTLAND.]
The Lord Advocate,
adverting to the conversation which had taken place a few evenings ago in the House on the subject of the appointment of a fourth baron of the exchequer in Scotland, observed, that when the vacancy in question occurred, he had been required, in the discharge of his official duty, to make a report, on the recommendation of the commissioners, on the courts of justice in scotland, to abstain from filling up any such vacancy that might occur after that recommendation. In order the better to enable himself to execute this task, he had submitted the subject to the consideration of the highest law authorities in Scotland, namely, the lord president of the court of session, the lord justice clerk, the lord chief commissioner of the jury court, and the lord chief baron of the exchequer. Those high authorities were unanimous in their opinion as to the expediency of filling up the vacancy. He was solicitous that the House should be put in possession of tin's report; not because it stated the opinion of the humble individual who addressed them, but because it comprehended the opinion of the highest legal authorities in Scotland on the subject. He would therefore move, "That an address be presented to his majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to order that there be laid before the House a Copy of the report made by the lord advocate of Scotland on the recommendation contained in the sixth Report of the commissioners on the courts of justice in Scotland, regarding the discontinuance of one of the Barons of the Court of Exchequer in Scotland."
Mr. Abercromby
rose, not to oppose the motion, but to express his extreme regret that, when a report had been made by commissioners appointed by that House, expressing the opinion of those commissioners, that the office in question should, in the event of a vacancy, not be 611ed up, his majesty should nevertheless have
96
Lord Binning
said, that the hon. and learned gentleman spoke as if his learned friend had himself originated the inquiry. It was not so. His learned friend had acted only ministerial. The secretary of state having required a report from his learned friend on the recommendation of the commissioners, he had done his duty by appealing on the subject to the highest law authorities of Scotland.
Mr. Abercromby,
in explanation, observed, that it was substantially the same thing. From whatever source the inquiry proceeded, it was evident that the act of government was in hostility to the opinion of the commissioners. He begged, however, to be distinctly understood, that nothing could be more foreign to his intention than to intimate any thing that was not entirely respectful to the learned lord.
Sir J. Newport
supported the necessity of an inquiry into the constitution of the court of exchequer in Scotland. It was evident that the information which was to be afforded on the subject, was absolutely forced from government by the observations made by his noble friend.
The motion was agreed to.
GIBRALTAR.]
Mr. Hume,
before he proceeded to the motion of which he had given notice, wished to correct a mistake that had occurred with reference to one of his statements yesterday evening. He had said that in the seventh class of the civil list in 1815, there was to be found an: expenditure which he had characterised as useless, namely, the sum of 1,372
l.
97
l.
l.
l.
98
l.
l.
99
l.
ad libitum,
l.
100
101
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that he did not rise to oppose the motion; indeed, he had not, with the exception of a slight alteration, any objection to produce the whole of the accounts moved for. He could not, however, help complaining of the uncandid manner in which the hon. member had charged both the governor of Gibraltar and his majesty's council, in the course of his speech, with extravagance and extortion. He did not wish, at present, to go at length into this question, as a proper period would arrive for its discussion. But he hoped members would reserve their opinions until that discussion came fairly before them. With respect to what the hon. member had said relative to the right of the Crown over conquered colonies, he conceived that there was no principle of the law of nations more generally admitted than that which transferred to the conquering sovereign the rights exercised over such colony by that power to which it previously belonged. He did not mean to object to the first or second resolutions; but to the third, he would, if it were not altered, propose an amendment, which was, that the whole account for the time mentioned should be produced, without specifying the items from year to year. He wished at the same time to observe, that there was not any foreign port in which similar duties to those complained of were not exacted. The right hon. member made some observations relative to certain sums remitted from Gibraltar, and received by his late majesty.
Sir J. Mackintosh,
having had occasion to know something of the administration of affairs in Gibraltar, and being acquainted with certain circumstances relating to the mode of making impositions on the inhabitants, could not but say that their rights had not been treated with that regard and respect which in justice should have been extended to them. At the same time, he meant to admit, that his majesty's government, in the revision of the Order in council, to which allusion had been made; had manifested a very commendable anxiety to do all they could to rectify a measure which he looked upon as improvident and bad; He could not, however, agree in the interpretation of the law of nations: which had been given by the right hon. gentleman and which, falling from a per-
102
Mr. Goulburn
complained of the uncandid course that had been taken by the hon. gentleman in bringing forward this question. He protested against the statement which he had made, and which tended to impeach the character of individuals, when merely moving for a return, of the amount of revenue raised at Gibraltar. He protested against such a course, because those charges could not be contradicted at the moment. He hail no difficulty in saying, that, throughout the long reign of his late majesty, every disposition had been shown to attendee the interests of the inhabitants on the one hand, and to support the just rights of
103
Colonel Dalrymple
said, the inhabitants of Gibraltar were, for the most part, Roman Catholics, Genoese, or foreigners of that description, and Jews; an extensive church was not, therefore, necessary. But there was a Protestant place of worship, and he had attended church for two years. In that edifice there was no want of room for those who pleased to attend divine service. He did not think that the garrison of Gibraltar would thank the hon. gentleman, if they were hurthened with a tax for the erection of a church. There were other inaccuracies in the statement of the hon. gentleman, which, at a proper period, he would point out.
The first and second motions were agreed to.
Mr. Hume
said, he had, in order to meet the objection of the chancellor of the exchequer, made the alteration which he had suggested in the third motion. That alteration had, however* defeated a very considerable part of the object he had in view, which was, to ascertain the annual amount of revenue collected in a
104
The third motion, as amended, was then agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, May 5, 1820.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS.]
Lord Auckland
rose to move for a committee to take into consideration the state of the Insolvent Debtors laws in England. It being understood to be the wish of their lordships, that such a committee should be appointed, he thought it unnecessary to trouble the House with any observations upon the subject. In consequence of an unfortunate omission in the act of last session for continuing the expiring laws, the operations of the Insolvent act had been suspended, and the effect had been the filling of the prisons of the metropolis to an extent frightful to contemplate, and producing an imminent danger of infectious diseases. If to avoid this: evil it should; be thought expedient that the debtor, I through misfortune and not fraud, should not be liable to the imprisonment to which he was now subjected; it would of course be considered just, that the creditor should have additional means afforded him of making the property of the debtor available, as a security, instead of that which he now had upon his person. It was chiefly to this point that he intended to call the attention of the committee. His lordship moved for the appointment of a committee, which was ordered.
105
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, May 5, 1820.
MACHINERY—PETITION FROM WILTSHIRE.]
Mr. Benett
presented a petition, signed by upwards of 6,000 persons, chiefly clothiers, clothworkers and manufacturers of Wiltshire (as a proof of the respectability of whom, the hon. member said, that among the names were those of eleven magistrates, one of whom was the chairman of the quarter sessions), complaining of the number of manufacturers who, in consequence of the introduction of machinery and other causes, had been driven out of work, and were compelled to have recourse for subsistance to the parochial rates. He could assure the House that this petition did not proceed from any political motive. There was no radical feeling in Wiltshire. Among the manufacturers of that county, numerous as they were, there existed no inclination to encourage sedition, or to obtain a remedy for the evils which they suffered, except by legal means. He hoped, therefore, that this petition would be favourably received by the House; and, however difficult the subject, that the House would feel the necessity of taking every possible means of mitigating the distress experienced, not only by the petitioners, but by the agricultural labourers, who looked to parliament for some alleviation of their case.—The petition was ordered to be printed.
DROITS OF THE CROWN, &C]
Mr. Brougham
said, that in rising to bring before the House the important subject of which he had given notice,—important, in so far as it was inseparably connected with the question of the civil list,—he trusted they would give him credit, when he assured them it was very far from his intention to trespass more than was absolutely necessary upon their time and attention. They would be the more disposed so to give him credit, when he begged leave to remind them that the bringing forward this question upon the present occasion was in reality none of his seeking. But he stood pledged to submit it to their consideration, and particularly] by what passed in 1812, in case his majesty's ministers should think proper to omit it in their arrangements. He appealed to the recollection of honourable gentlemen, whether he had not given that notice, or rather whether he had not been driven
106
†
107
jure coronœ
sacra patrimonia coronœ:
jure coronœ.
terre tenant,
dictum
108
multum vexata questio
109
110
pro tanto,
111
ex necessitate rei,
trove,
112
l.
113
minutié
114
l.
l.
non plus
115
l.
116
117
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.
118
l.
119
l.
l.
l.
120
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.;
l.
l.
l.
121
122
123
l.
124
†
125
l.
126
127
Mr. Canning
began by observing, that if any stranger had entered the House during the last few sentences of the hon.
128
129
130
131
132
l.
l.
l;
l.
l.;
l.:
l.
§
133
134
l.
135
136
137
summum bonum
138
Mr. Brougham
explained, that the right hon. gentleman must have misapprehended him, or, in common policy, he would not have so far misrepresented what he had said. He had not supposed that the droits occasioned war. No king nor House of Commons would ever be so mad as to go to war for the sake of droits of the Admiralty. What he had said, and
139
Mr. Canning
admitted that the explanation made the argument quite different; but the reference to the Smyrna fleet appeared to him to go a little further.
Sir James Mackintosh
said, that if he chose his station in debate otherwise than from a sense of duty, most assuredly he should not have taken the station which brought him so nearly into contact with the great and powerful speech of the statesman and lawyer who introduced the subject, nor that which called upon him to reply to the eloquence and talents of his right hon. friend who had just sat down. Considering the speech of his hon. and learned friend as consisting wholly of reason and knowledge, and entirely free from objections usually made in that House—considering that it discussed exclusively a great and grave question of state policy, without turning it at all into a means of acquiring popularity or an instrument of inflammation, he could not regard the observations which he was now to attempt to answer but as ingenious fallacies. One of the topics urged by his right hon. friend—he could not call it argument, although it was a topic often used with effect, and its general effect he did not wish to lessen—was the reverence for feudal monarchy and gothic government, the charge of stripping the Crown of its trappings, and the monarch of his dignity. This topic was inapplicable altogether on the present occasion; for the speech of his hon. and learned friend expressed as strong a regard for the law, for the constitution, for the honour and dignity of the Crown, as any speech that had ever been Uttered in that House. His right hon. friend ought to view feudal monarchy as connected with all its evils, with the baneful and oppressive evils which were gradually removed during four centuries—from Magna Charta to the statute of Wards and Liveries. This was the olden time so warmly eulogized! This was an attempt at celebrating the golden age of old times, which he thought more suitable to a venerable major nut of doors, than to his right hon. friend [a laugh and cheers]. The bold
140
141
142
143
l.,
l.
l.
144
145
146
l.
147
Mr. Marryat
rose to state some facts which had come under his own knowledge respecting the droits of the Crown in conquered colonies. In Trinidad, the owners of land had been required to take out new grants for their lands, with burthens attached to which they had never before been subject. He saw by the Trinidad gazette that 4,800 acres of land were offered, to sale on the part, of the Crown, being confiscated under the new regulation. These confiscations had taken place in the only two parishes which had yet been surveyed for the purposes of the new regulation, out of the 32 parishes in the island. If the others yielded confiscations in the same proportion, there would be 155,000 acres in the whole island. What this land would sell for it was not easy to ascertain; if for 4
l.
l.
Mr. Wynn
said, it was his intention to detain the House only for a few moments.
148
Sir J. Newport
said, that as he considered that the power which the present system would give to the Crown was open to great abuse, he should vote for the resolutions. With respect to the revenue of four-and-half per cent, it was said that it was intended for the service of the colonies, the erection of fortifica-
149
Mr. Macdonald
said, that after all which had been heard from time to time on the subject of economy, after the many promises which had been made, it might have been reasonably supposed that the present period would be one when something would be done for the benefit of the people. If such a supposition had been entertained, was it not, he would ask, borne out by the promises of Mr. Perceval at the commencement of the regency, and by the statements (he would not call them pledges) of the noble lord opposite, in 1816, that the demise of the Grown would be the proper period for such a measure as was now proposed? But, at the arrival of that period, it was little to be expected that the surveyor, of woods and forests, and the paymaster of the forces would be found to say that it was a matter of delicacy now, and ought not to be entered into. Nevertheless, the fact seemed to be, that at the period that those promises were given and those hopes held out, no revision or alteration was intend-
150
ad captandum
l.
151
l.
l.
l.,
152
l.,
153
Sir Robert Wilson
concurred with his hon. and learned friend who had made the motion, that there was not an officer engaged in the capture of the Spanish vessels who did not think his professional character tarnished by the transaction. He might mention another evil arising out of these captures before a declaration of war. After the peace of Amiens an order was given to seize and detain French vessels, and the consequence was, that the French government retaliated by detaining all the English who were at the time within the dominions of France. This measure of the French government was by many justified, on the ground that it was a proper return for such previous treatment. The gallant general concluded by saying that he should vote for the motion [The cry of "Question!" became general].
154
Mr. Tierney
said, he would make a few observations on the state of the question, and the engagement to which voting on one side or the other would pledge the members of the House. He could assure the House and the gentlemen opposite, who were so anxious to bring this debate to a conclusion, that he should not detain them long. After the able speech of his hon. and learned friend, in which the whole facts and law of the case had been stated and supported; after the speech of the right hon. gentleman opposite, and the reply of his hon. and learned friend near him, the merits of the question required no farther discussion. He rose, therefore, not to add any thing to what had been already said on the question itself, but to set members right on the real purport of the motion. The House, then, was now called upon at the beginning of a new reign, to make a final arrangement of the civil list for the whole of that reign. On such an occasion it was necessary to make the most minute inquiry, and to exert the most scrupulous caution to make the arrangement as wise and proper as it would be lasting. When a new settlement was proposed, it was incumbent on the House to take into consideration all the funds at present at the disposal of the Crown, in order to know what charges should be made before that settlement was effected. If they now neglected to do so, another opportunity would not again occur during the reign. When a motion like this should be afterwards brought forward, it would be sufficient to say, that the matter had been already settled, and thus alt further consideration of it would be shut out. The proposed resolution went no further than this, that it was expedient to take into consideration the droits of the Admiralty, the 4½ per cent colonial duties, and other funds usually at the disposal of the Crown, with the making of such an arrangement concerning them as would be consistent with the maintenance of the dignity of the Crown, and the interests of the country. Those, therefore, who should vote for his hon. and learned friend's motion would pledge themselves to no principle on the subject—they would merely express an opinion that the system formerly acted upon, now that a new arrangement was to be made, ought to be taken into consideration. Any gentleman who voted against it would say by his vote, that parliament ought to give the subject
155
l.
156
l.
l.
l.,
157
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he had not intended to address the House on the question had it not been for some observations of the right hon. gentleman. The House would see, in the contrariety of the opinions of the hon. gentlemen opposite, what good a committee was likely to do. Three or four of these hon. gentlemen had spoken on this question, and none of them could be brought to see it in the same light. They all disagreed, not only, with his side of the House, but with themselves. Ministers proposed to continue a system which had been four years in operation, and which was better understood by experience than any of the new-fashioned, new-fangled plans of the gentlemen opposite. It possessed about it some of the venerable characters of antiquity. This system had been shown to be good on a four years trial. It was framed on a scale of reduction to the amount of 135,000
l.
l.
l.
158
Sir Joseph Yorke
agreed with the hon. and learned mover, in the account he had given of the Souchong and Congo expedition of a gallant admiral. He always rejoiced at an opportunity of supporting ministers; but on the present occasion, unless the chancellor of the exchequer or any of his hon. friends around him could give a better reason than had hitherto been assigned for the grant to that gallant admiral, he should vote for the motion.
Mr. W. Smith
highly approved of what had been said by his hon. and learned friend concerning the expedition of sir Home Popham. Adverting to the subject of the civil-list, the hon. gentleman observed, that he conceived it a settled custom to arrange it at the commencement of a new reign. Such an arrangement of it had been contemplated by the commit* tee of 1816. Those, therefore, who opposed on the present inquiry occasion differed from the recommendation of that committee. Nothing was proposed by the present motion but an examination which the report then made contemplated, and he therefore called upon the authors of that report to support his hon. and learned friend.
Mr. Bathurst
contended, that it was a fallacy to say that the motion of the hon. and learned gentleman was a motion merely to obtain information; The object of the motion was not merely to inquire into the amount of the droits of the Admiralty and the other funds, but to re-
159
Mr. Brougham
rose to reply. He said he should be the less excusable in farther trespassing on the indulgence of the House, both because he had occupied so much of their time in opening the question, and because so little had been urged on the other side; and that little had been so triumphantly answered by his hon. friend near him (sir J. Mackintosh), and on the bench behind (Mr. Macdonald). He could, not retort upon the gentlemen opposite the sarcasm of the chancellor of the exchequer, on him and his friends that they differed from one another and from themselves, each varying from his fellow, and no one consistent with himself. The minister had found out the most easy and effectual method of protecting themselves from such a sneer—at least, from the greater part of it—a method as obvious as it was simple, and as efficacious as it was obvious; it consisted in none of them speaking at all except one. Accordingly all kept silence, save the president of the board of control, and. be not being in a condition to differ with his companions, had only been able to exemplify the other branch of his friend's zeal by contradicting himself. But the silence of some gentlemen on this occasion surprised and disappointed him more than that of others. Upon a great, legal, and constitutional question—one touching the rights of the sovereign, and involving at every turn, as was said, the honour and dignity of the throne, how happened it that the House lacked the two chief law officers of the Crown, the attorney and solicitor-general—the props and pillars of the prerogative—the sworn defenders of the sanctuary—the
tutamen,
decus,
160
161
tirade,
162
163
The question being put, "That the other order of the day be now read," the House divided: Ayes, 273. Noes 155. Majority against Mr. Brougham's motion, 118.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Althorp, viscount
Allen, John
Anson, sir G.
164
Aubrey, sir John
Hornby, E.
Astle, W.
Honywood, W. P.
Bennet, John
Hughes, col.
Bentinck, lord W.
Hume, Jos.
Boughton, Rouse
Hurst, R.
Boughey, sir J
Haldimand, W.
Belgrave, viscount
Jervoise, G. P.
Barham, J. F.
Kennedy, T. F.
Barham, J. F. jun
Lambton, J. G.
Baring, sir Thos.
Lemon, sir W.
Bernard, viscount
Lushington, Steph.
Barrett, S. M.
Langston, J. H.
Benyon, Benj.
Lloyd, S. J.
Bernal, Ralph
Mackintosh, sir J.
Birch, Joseph
Madocks, W. A.
Brougham, H.
Martin, John.
Bury, viscount
Milbank, Mark
Byng, G.
Mildmay, St. J. P.
Beaumont, T. W.
Milton, viscount.
Bright, Henry
Monck, J. B.
Calcraft, John
Moore, Peter.
Calcraft, J. H.
Moore, Abraham
Campbell, hon. J.
Mostyn, sir T.
Chamberlayne, W.
Maberly, John
Carter, John
Maberly, J.L.
Cavendish, lord G.
Marryat, Jas.
Cavendish, Henry
Mahon, hon. S.
Clifford, A.
Neville, hon. R.
Clifton, viscount
Newman, R. W.
Coke, T. W.
Newport, sir J.
Colburne, N. R.
Nugent, lord
Concannpn, lord.
Ord, Wm,
Coussmaker, G.
Osborne, lord E.
Crespigny, sir W. de
Ossulston, visct.
Crompton, Sam.
Palmer, C. Fysche
Calvert, N.
Pares, Thos.
Davies, T. H.
Parnell, sir H.
Denman, Thos.
Philips, G.
Dundas, C.
Philips, Geo. jun.
Duncannon, visc.
Power, Rich.
Evans, W.
Powlett, hon. W.
Ellice, Ed.
Pym, Francis
Fergusson, sir R.
Ricardo, David
Fitzgerald, Ld. W.
Ridley, sir M. W.
Fitzroy, lord J.
Robarts, Abr.
Folkestone, visc.
Robarts, G.
Frankland, R.
Robinson, sir C.
Ferrand, Robert
Rowley, sir Wm.
Finlay, Kirkman
Rumbold, C.
Folkes, sir M.
Russell, lord G. W.
Gordon, Robt.
Russell, lord John
Craham, J.R. G.
Russell, R. G.
Graham, Sandford
Rickford, Wm.
Grenfell, Pascoe
Smith, hon. R.
Griffith, J. W.
Smith Sam.
Guise, sir W. B.
Smith, John
Gurney, Hudson
Smith, George
Gurney, R. H.
Smith, Robert
Gaskell, B.
Smith, W.
Hamilton, lord A
Scarlett, James
Harbord, hon. Ed.
Scudamore, Robt.
Hervey, D. W.
Sefton, earl of
Heathcote, G. J.
Stanley, lord
Heron, sir R.
Stuart, lord J.
Hill, lord A.
Sykes; Dan.
Hobhouse J. G
Spurrier, C. H.
Howard, hon. W.
Scott, J
165
Tavistock, marq.
Whitbread, S. C.
Taylor, M. A.
Wilkins, Walter
Taylor C. W.
Williams, T.O.
Tierney, right hon. G.
Williams, W.
Tremayne, J. H.
Williams, sir R.
Townshend, lord C.
Wilson, sir Robt.
Warre, J. Ashley
Wood, alderman
Webbe, Ed.
TELLERS.
Western, C. C.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Whitbread, W. H.
Macdonald, James
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, May 8, 1820.
WOOL TAX.]
Mr. Stuart Wortley
said, he had the honour to present a petition from the merchants and manufacturers in Wool, of Huddersfield and its neighbourhood, against the late duty imposed on foreign wool. The petitioners stated, and he believed justly, that, as an effect of that impolitic tax, a considerable quantity of capital had been sent out of the country. A noble friend of his intended to give that night a notice of a motion for its repeal. Till that discussion he should defer further observation on the effects of a tax whose further continuance he so much deprecated.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table.
Lord Milton
said, he wished to put a question to the right hon. the president of the board of trade. He wished to know from him, whether it was the intention of his majesty's government to repeal the late duty on wool? If such an intention was entertained, it would afford him the greatest satisfaction, and in their hands he would gladly leave it. If, on the contrary, they were not disposed to take that course, he rose for the purpose of giving notice that on Tuesday next he should move for the repeal of the late duty on foreign wool.
Mr. Robinson
stated, in answer, that he did not know if to be the intention of his majesty's government to take any such step. The notice, of the noble lord might therefore stand as proposed.
COMMERCIAL RESTRICTIONS—PETITION OF THE MERCHANTS OF LONDON.]
Mr. Baring
said, he had the honour to rise for the purpose of presenting from a most extensive and respectable body, the merchants of London. Whether he adverted to the terms, in which their petition was couched, to the respectability? of the gentlemen by whom it was signed, or if the peculiar circumstances of the country
166
167
168
l.
s
d.
l.
s.
169
170
†
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
"How small of all the ills which men endure, The part which Kings or Lords can cause or cure."
180
181
182
On the question, that the petition do lie on the table,
Mr. Grenfell
said, that after the able and eloquent speech of his hon. friend, it would be idle in him to attempt entering into the subject. But as it was a subject upon which he had before delivered his opinions, he hoped he might be allowed to express his opinion upon it now; and he assured the House that in doing so he should not take up much of their time. He begged then to state, that he gave his humble, but most hearty concurrence in every principle contained in the petition, and so ably advocated by the hon. mover; and he begged to add, that in the House, or out of the House, he would give its principles his most zealous and active co-operation.
Mr. F. Robinson
said, that as no other gentleman seemed disposed to rise, he felt it necessary to offer a few observations on the question so ably introduced by the hon. mover. He hoped the hon. member and the House would do him the justice to believe that he was fully sensible of the extreme importance of the subject before them. He had always given it as his opinion, that the restrictive system of commerce in this country was founded
183
184
185
Mr. Philips
argued, that the right hon. gentleman had made liberal admissions,
186
Mr. W. Douglas
said, he very much lamented that on a question like that before the House, there should be heard the least expression of any thing like party feeling. He was convinced that it could not be the wish of the petitioners to take any other view, but to represent to parliament what they really thought to be the sound principles of political economy, and to show how far the restrictive system of trade was contrary to those principles. Those alone were the objects of the petitioners; and he begged to express his entire concurrence in the sentiments of the hon. mover. He was happy to hear the right hon. the president of the broad of trade express his concurrence in those sentiments; but still he could not help feeling disappointment at some parts of that speech. The right hon. gentleman concurred in the views of the petitioners. He considered them important and desirable; but although a similar petition had been presented at the conclusion of the last session of parliament, and though the right hon. gentleman then, as now, professed sentiments friendly to those objects, yet he did not point out what practical alterations might be made; he did not say what specific plan might be
187
Mr. Beaumont
concurred in the principles laid down by the hon. mover. Much of the evil under which the country now laboured might be traced to her commercial system, and the sooner it was improved the better. It was a fit subject for the interference of his majesty's ministers. When it was recollected that the right hon. the president of the board of trade, had so unequivocally expressed his opinion against the present restrictive system, that fact alone was sufficiently strong to require the interference of ministers, and to induce them to promote, by all practical means, the objects suggested by the petitioners.
Lord Milton
said, he had heard the petition before the House read with great pleasure; he had listened too with much satisfaction to the speech of the hon. member who brought it forward. If any thing indeed in the present distressed state of the country, could give satisfaction, it was that of hearing the sound principles of political economy and the liberal principles of commerce embraced by so respectable a body of men as the merchants and traders of London. But that was not the only satisfaction which he had experienced in the course of the debate. The speech of the right hon. the president of the board of trade would have increased the satisfaction he felt on the present occasion, were it not for the little alloy which was too apparent in it. To him it appeared, that the principles and the conduct of the right hon. gentleman were not in unison. He had expressed very excellent principles, but when he came to explain his conduct, and the conduct of the government with whom he acted, he was not
188
l.
189
║
190
—nec nautical pinus
Mutabit merces; omnis ferit omnia tellus
191
Mr. Ricardo
begged the noble lord to recollect, that at the time when he spoke on the bullion question last session the price of gold was at 4
l.
s.
l.
s.
1.
s.
192
193
Mr. Ellice,
after a few observations in reply to Mr. Ricardo, said, that since the return to cash payments was finally settled, to the present time, every staple article or produce connected with manufactures had experienced a fall of from 30 to 50 per cent; the only articles exempt from the operation of that system were agricultural produce, and that was kept up by the protection of the corn laws. With respect to the petition before the House, he entirely agreed in the objects proposed, and he was willing to give the fullest credit to the professions made that night by the right hon. the president of the board of trade, to concur in the propositions that petition contained. But, unfortunately, the state of the debt and the finances, rendered it impossible, without some great alteration, for the House to pay much attention to the petition before them. When they considered the state of the public debt, when they knew how the right hon. gentleman opposite would be reminded by his right hon. friend the chancellor of the exchequer of the loss to the revenue which would follow an alteration in the system, they would, he feared, but deceive the country, if they were to encourage hopes of any great advantage being likely to be derived from the present petition, or the system, however admirable, which it suggested. There were other consideration? which ought to be met. His hon. friend who presented the petition had stated that a number of Gentle-
194
Mr. Marryat,
after complimenting the petitioners and different members of the House, for the liberal ideas which they had expressed, entered into some statements as to the commercial advantages which this country enjoyed from its colonies. By the restrictions imposed on them, and the manner in which the intercourse was carried on with them, they were made to contribute most largely towards the prosperity of the mother country: they were limited to an intercourse with us alone: their produce was imported in British ships, and paid for in British manufactures.
Mr. T. Wilson
said, he could not but concur with the hon. gentleman who spoke last but one, that in the present
195
Mr. Baring
said, that there was one point of importance on which he had the misfortune totally to differ with his hon. friend (Mr. Ricardo); on that point, as on every other, he would differ with him with reluctance and with diffidence. When his hon. friend stated that the difference in the currency was but as 3
l.
s.
l.
s.
l.
l.
s.
196
197
Mr. Ricardo,
in explanation, stated that he had never imagined that the currency had never been depreciated more than 4 per cent. He had merely contended, that at the time when the subject was taken up by parliament in the last year, there was only that depreciation; which was too small to warrant an alteration of the ancient standard. He was well aware that during some of the latter years of the war, the depreciation had been as great as 25 per cent.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table. A similar petition was presented from the chamber of commerce of Edinburgh. On the motion, that it do lie on the table,
Mr. Ricardo
said, he would take that opportunity of making an observation as to the two standards of gold and silver. He fully agreed with his hon. friend, that a payment in both would facilitate the payment of the public creditor; but then there was a question whether two stand ards would not be more liable to fluctuation than one invariable standard. If payment were made in one metal, it would be liable to less fluctuation than if made; in two, and in two it would be less than if made in three; therefore he considered the payment in one metal as preferable, being liable to less fluctuation.
Mr. Baring
considered the difference in this respect as more theoretical than it I would be found in practice. He had never found the variation to be so great as was apprehended; and as, upon his hon. friend's own admission, the payments in both metals would afford a facility which could not be other wise acquired, bethought that plan preferable.
Mr. W. Smith
thought that the price of one would act as a corrective on the other. He therefore preferred the plan of payments in both.
Ordered to lie on the table.
198
CIVIL LIST.]
On the order of the day for further considering the Report of the Committee on the Civil List,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that before he moved the second reading of the resolutions, he should shortly explain the circumstances under which they were offered to their consideration. In doing so, he should have lamented if it had been necessary to trouble the House with that infinite mass of voluminous details which at former times it had been necessary to investigate. The object of those who had on former occasions offered those details to parliament was, either to explain the manner in which deficiencies had arisen in the civil list, and to exculpate those who had had the management of it, or to form the ground of some new system. Neither of those causes now called upon him for any observations He had no deficiencies to account for, because none had occurred since the last arrangement of the civil list, and he had no new system to propose, because the system then adopted had been found perfectly effectual. In comparing that last establishment in 1816, with the former arrangements, it was necessary to remark that at four former times had parliament made payment of the debts of the civil list, and four times without accounts or investigation on the mere statement of the fact in a message from the Crown—and thus four times had voted a permanent increase of the civil list. In 1782, a very considerable improvement in the civil list arrangements took place, and permanent rules were laid down for the administration its revenues. It was thus the civil list charges were divided into classes, to be paid in regular succession, and on this principle it was hoped that such, a system of economy would be carried into practice, as would prevent the recurrence of embarrassments. If Mr. Burke, the illustrious author of that bill, had gone a little farther, his hopes would probably have been well founded; but though he divided the ordinary expenditure into classes, a power was given to make occasional payments to any amount. Though no limits were set to the contingent expenses, there was no deficiency in the civil list thenceforward, till the breaking out of the French war—but after that; all the contingent expenses were so increased, that there was an arrear of 900,000
l.
199
l.
l.
200
l.
l.
l.
Lord John Russell
said, it was with considerable pain, that, on an occasion of a grant such as the present, he felt it his duty to move that this report be taken into further consideration at a future day. This he did with the view of its coming before a select committee. It would have given him much pleasure if his majesty's ministers had taken this latter part of the task upon themselves, because it would best have come from them. He felt, also, doubts of the success of his motion, when he found that neither the learning, the wit, nor the eloquence of his hon. and learned friend (Mr. Brougham) were successful in an appeal on the subject the other evening. His motion, however, had one advantage which did not belong to that which was submitted by his hon. and learned friend—that it was not complex in its nature, nor intricate in the immediate question to which it referred. The question to which he wished to call the attention of the House was simply this—whether they, the representatives of the people, just returned from the people, with their professions and promises still on their lips, would, in a new parliament, take estimates into which they had made no inquiry, on which they
201
202
l.
l.
l.,
l.
203
204
Mr. Warre
seconded the amendment, and said, that when the committee of 1816 was appointed, it was deprived of the very life and essence of a committee of inquiry. When his right hon. friend (Mr. Tierney) proposed that it should be allowed to send for persons, papers, and records, his proposition was negatived; and when a proposal was made to call before the committee an efficient officer of the lord Steward's department, it was rejected. The committee had nothing to proceed upon; they were obliged to trust implicitly to papers delivered to them from the different departments. Into the grounds on which those papers were formed, they were not allowed to inquire. He could not, therefore, rely upon the accuracy of those statements, or upon the correctness of those calculations, to which the chancellor of the exchequer appeared to think the House so peculiarly bound to attend. He was by no means disposed to countenance any denunciation against the splendor of royalty.
205
Mr. Huskisson
said, he had always thought that there was great difficulty in discussing this question, because, from the terms in which they expressed themselves, it appeared as if there were opposite and conflicting interests at stake. But he was sure that every person who carefully directed his attention to the subject, would perceive that the civil list involved the general interests of the state. In the first parliament of a new reign, such an inquiry as that proposed by the noble lord was likely to be received with great favour. But he would tell the noble lord, that, in the practice of former reigns, there was no precedent for such an inquiry. There was nothing in the circumstances of the late demise, or the present accession, which could be urged as a reason for taking the civil list out of its ordinary course. The amount of the expenditure necessary for supporting the dignity of the Crown, and defraying the charges of the civil government, was not necessarily changed by the demise of one sovereign, and the accession of another. On the present occasion, indeed, there were circumstances which, even admitting that precedents were in favour of the noble lord's motion, would induce the House to deviate from such a course. When the noble lord talked of the groom of the stole, his answer to the noble lord was, that the groom of the stole belonged to his late majesty, and that the saving arising from the termination of that office would be carried to the account of the public; for the whole of the Windsor establishment terminated on the demise of the late
206
l.
s.
d.,
207
l.
l.,
l.,
l.,
208
l.
l.
209
Mr. Brougham
said, he was really sorry at that hour to detain the House, and perhaps owed some apology for again claiming its attention; but he thought proper to offer a few words in explanation of some observations of his, which had been greatly misunderstood by the right hon. gentleman who had just sat down. He was most unwilling to allow the House, or even the right hon. gentleman himself (who, he trusted, was the only person who, hearing what be had said, had so misunderstood him), to go away under an impression so wide of his real meaning as
210
l.
s.
211
Mr. Tierney
said, that this discussion came on under circumstances of a nature perfectly unparalleled. It regarded the appropriation of a sum of 850,000
l.
212
l.
l.,
213
l.
214
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
215
l.
l.
l.
216
l.
l.
l.
217
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
218
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
219
l.
l.
220
l.
221
Mr. Canning
said, that all the points urged in the course of the debate were resolvable into a few plain, simple, propositions. The House was now called upon to do what had been done at the commencement of every former reign, namely, to vote a civil list for the support of the civil government and household of the sovereign. Under such circumstances the first step to he taken was, to examine the precedents of good times—he meant such as were regarded by all men with satisfaction. Going back to the Revolution, it was found that the vote of the civil list from the reign of king William to George 3rd, had been carried in this House in the first instance without minute investigation; and the only inference he wished to draw from this fact was, not that the House was bound to follow implicitly the course of precedents, but that those who proposed a deviation were bound to show the special circumstances that rendered it advisable. If it could be shown that in the course of the last reign there had been no examination into these matters, or that from the lapse of time it was possible that abuses had crept in, it might form some ground for the present proposal. If, on the other hand, it could be proved, that although an investigation, both minute and recent, had taken place, yet that since that date there had been great exceedings on the part of the Crown, a manifest want of economy, or an application for an increase, then some ground would perhaps be laid for a deviation from the ordinary precedent. But when these things had
222
primâ facie
223
224
225
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Tierney
denied that he had wished to examine into the mode in which the privy purse was expended. As he did not intend to trouble the House with his motion to-morrow, he might be allowed to add, though not within the strict limits of explanation, that, from the statement of the right hon. gentleman, it appeared that the 110,000
l.
226
l
The question being put, that the word "now" stand part of the question, the House divided: Ayes, 256; Noes, 157.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Graham, J. R. G.
Allen, J. H.
Grenfell, Pascoe
Althorp, visc.
Griffiths, J. W.
Anson, hon. G.
Guise, sir W.
Anson, sir G.
Gurney, R.
Aubrey, sir J.
Heygate, alderman
Boughey, sir John
Haldimand, W.
Bentinck, lord W.
Hamilton, lord A.
Benett, John
Harbord, hon. E.
Butterworth, Jos.
Harvey, D. W.
Barham, J. F. jun.
Heathcote, G.
Baring, sir Thos.
Heron, sir R.
Barnard, visc.
Hill, lord A.
Barrett, S. M.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Beaumont, T. P.
Hollywood, W. P.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Hornby, E.
Benyon, Ben.
Howard, hon. W.
Bernal, Ralph
Hughes, W. L.
Birch, Jos.
Hughes, col.
Brougham, H.
Hurst, R.
Burdett, sir F.
Jervoise, G. P.
Bury, visc.
Kennedy, T. F.
Byng, George
Lethbridge, sir T. B.
Bright, H.
Langstone, T. H.
Crawley, Sam.
Lamb, hon. W.
Calvert, Nic.
Lambton, J. G.
Calcraft, John
Lemon, sir W.
Calcraft, John, jun.
Lloyd, J. M.
Calvert, C.
Lushington, S.
Campbell, hon. J.
Maberly, John
Chamberlayne, W.
Maberly, W. L.
Carter, John
Marryat, Jos.
Cavendish, lord G.
Macdonald, J.
Cavendish, Henry
Mackintosh, sir J.
Clifford, capt.
Martin, John
Clifton, visc.
Milbank, Mark
Coke, T. W.
Mildmay.P. St. J.
Colborne, N. R.
Milton, visc.
Concannon, L.
Monck, J. B.
Coussmaker, G.
Moore, Peter
Crompton, Sam.
Moore, A
De Crespigny, sir W.
Mostyn, sir T.
Davies, T. H.
Newman, R. W.
Denison, Wm.
Newport, sir J.
Denman, Thos.
Nugent, lord
Duncannon, visc.
Ord, W.
Dundas, Thos.
Osborne, lord F.
Dundas, C.
Ossulston, visc.
Evans, Wm.
Palmer, col.
Ellice, Edw.
Palmer, C. F.
Finlay, K.
Pares, Thos.
Farrand, R.
Parnell, sir H.
Fergusson, sir R.
Parnell, W.
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Pelham, hon. C. A.
Folkestone, visc.
Philips, George
Frankland, R.
Philips, G. jun.
Gaskell, B.
Ponsonby, hon. F. C.
Gordon, Robert
Power, R.
Graham, S.
Powlett, hon. W.
227
Pym, Francis
Sykes, D.
Rickford, Wm,
Spurrier, C.
Ricardo, David
Townshend, lord C.
Ridley, sir M. W.
Tavistock, marquis
Robarts, Abr.
Taylor, M. A.
Robarts, George
Taylor, C,
Robinson, sir G.
Tierney, rt. hon. G.
Rowley, sir W.
Webbe, E.
Rumbold, C.
Western, C.
Russell, lord G. W.
Whitbread, W. H.
Russell, R. G.
Whitbread, S. C.
Sebright, sir John
Wilkins, Walter
Smith, George
Williams, sir R.
Smith, Samuel
Williams, T. P.
Smith, Wm.
Williams, W.
Smith, John
Wilson, sir Robert
Smith, Robert
Wood, alderman
Scarlett, James
Wyvill, M.
Scudamore, R.
TELLERS.
Sefton, earl of
Russell, lord John
Stuart, lord J.
Warre, J. Ashley.
The Resolutions were then read second time, and agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, May 9, 1820.
MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CRIMINAL LAWS.]
Sir James Mackintosh
rose, pursuant to notice, to submit certain propositions to the House touching the present state of the criminal law, founded on the report of the committee which had been appointed last session, to take into consideration so much of the criminal code as related to the infliction of capital punishment. The propositions which he should have the honor to propose, embraced two objects; the first was the appointment of a committee for a similar purpose as that which sat during the last session; and, in the second place, he should move for leave to bring in six bring in for the amendment of the criminal law, agreeably to the recommendation contained in the report of the late committee. As he understood there existed no intention in that quarter where he should much regret hostility, to oppose the propositions which he should have the honor to submit, he certainly should not trespass long on the attention of the House, did he not think it respectful towards those new members, who had not heard the former arguments, very shortly to review the nature of the grounds on which this subject was introduced. The object for which the committee was appointed by the last House of Commons, was, to ascertain, by the fullest inquiry and by the best experience, whether the severity of capital punishments did not
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
Mr. Canning,
after complimenting his hon. and learned friend on the manner in which he had again brought forward this important subject, proceeded to say, that although he certainly should not object to the present motion, it must not be considered that any man, by acceding to it, was pledged to entertain any further proceeding. He should be happy to see the purposes for which his hon. and learned friend wished the appointment of the committee fully developed; and he could assure him, that no objection would be made on his part to any ulterior proposition, for objection's sake; or unless there should appear to be some solid and substantial ground for doubting its expediency.
Mr. Bennet,
after bestowing a high eulogium on the unremitting exertions of his hon. and learned friend to amend the criminal code, and expressing a fervent hope that his humane perseverance would
236
Sir J. Mackintosh
would merely address a few words to that part of his hon. friend's speech which was directed towards himself personally. When his lamented friend sir S. Romilly brought in his bill for the abolition of the horrible
237
GRAMPOUND DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.]
Lord John Russell
rose for the purpose of submitting to the House the motion of which he had given notice, for leave to bring in a bill to exclude the borough of Grampound from sending members to parliament, and to enable the borough of Leeds to assume that privilege. In doing so, he would shortly trouble the House with his views on the subject. He had in the course of last session stated his own opinion of the propriety of disfranchising the borough of Grampound, or any other borough similarly situated, and of extending the franchise thus forfeited to large towns or populous districts. When he stated this opinion, it was, he
238
l.
l.,
l.
239
Mr. Canning
said, that as it, had been distinctly understood in the last session of the last parliament, that the noble, lord who now introduced this measure should not be in the smallest degree prejudiced in again bringing forward the subject, so far as this proceeding might have been prejudiced by the dissolution of the last, and the formation of a new parliament, that circumstance would be amply sufficient to justify any individual who might wish to oppose the introduction of this bill in abstaining from pursuing that course. He, however, felt no such inclination. He was perfectly disposed, on his own part, and on the part of those with whom he acted, to see the noble lord's bill brought before the House for discussion. And so far as the acknowledgment of the principle, that a borough convicted of gross bribery and corruption, such as in former times would produce an order for disfranchisement, went, he was ready to say that to such disfranchisement, in such a proved case, he had no objection. So far would he go. But he was sure it was not necessary to appeal to the noble lord's candour for the preservation of any ulterior opinion as to the mode in which the franchise, so taken away, should be disposed of; because he was convinced the noble lord would recollect that, in the last session of parliament, the introduction of the town of Leeds rested solely on his own will and opinion, without any previous concert or understanding, expressed or implied, with any other persons, as to the propriety of selecting that particular place. No person, he believed, but the noble mover himself, was cognizant of the place to which he wished to transfer the franchise. When the bill came regularly before the House for discussion, he should be prepared to enter into all the considerations that he longed to it. He was at present only desirous that the consent which, individually,
240
Lord J. Russell
said, it was not his intention to call for any further proceeding. The inquiry last year rendered it unnecessary.
Lord A. Hamilton
observed, that, if it were determined to take away the elective franchise from Grampound, he could suggest places in that part of the country with which he was more intimately connected to which it might be extended with advantage.
Lord J. Russell
wished to observe, that it was necessary to introduce in the bill then before the House the name of some place to which the elective franchise was to be transferred. He had no objection to granting the franchise any other borough. The right hon. gentleman must know, that when bills were brought in respecting other boroughs in which bribery and corruption had prevailed, the title of those bills was "a bill for preventing bribery and corruption in such a borough." It was quite impossible to give such a title to the bill, which did not go to prevent bribery and corruption for the future in Grampound, but to deprive it entirely of its franchises. With respect to the admission that was made in the last session
241
Mr. D. Gilbert
perfectly agreed in the observation, that it would be very inexpedient, where several boroughs were disfranchised, to extend the rights thus forfeited to any one place.
Lord Milton
observed, that it would be extremely inconvenient, supposing a number of boroughs to be disfranchised, to give the right of voting to those who, as freeholders, had now a right of voting for county members. Supposing, for instance, five Cornish boroughs to fall under the lash of the House—a circumstance by no means impossible—those to whom the franchise was transferred would then have to vote for twelve members—two for the county, and ten for other places.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill, which lord John Russell forthwith brought up. It was read the first time.
THE QUEEN.]
Lord A. Hamilton
rose
242
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, the only answer he could give the noble lord was, that, undoubtedly it would become necessary to propose to parliament to make a provision for the queen, as well as for several other branches of the royal family. The subject would soon be brought under the consideration of parliament.
MOTION RESPECTING THE CRIMINAL CONDUCT AND PROCEEDINGS OF GEORGE EDWARDS.]
Mr. Alderman Wood,
in rising to bring forward his motion relative to Edwards, who was said to be connected with the Cato-street conspiracy, begged to assure the House that he had no other end or object in view than that of public justice. Before he gave notice of this motion, he had done every thing in his power, by application to the Secretary of state for the home department, to have this individual brought to trial. The information which he possessed came to his knowledge in his magisterial capacity. He laid the documents before lord Sidmouth, and offered to bring forward, for examination at his office, the different witnesses upon whose testimony they were made out. His representations not having been acted upon, he felt it his duty to bring the subject before parliament. He had looked over the depositions of more than thirty persons, and those documents which he held in his hand he should feel it necessary to read at length to the House, unless his motion for a committee was granted [a laugh]. He assured the House that he had not the slightest wish to occupy their attention more than was absolutely necessary. If the House would allow the appointment of a select committee, he would undertake to satisfy them of the facts which he had to allege against this man, Edwards. This was a question of a grave and serious nature, and called for their most patient
243
l.
244
245
246
Mr. Grenfell.
—I beg to know on what authority the hon. alderman is proceeding. Were these affidavits? Was this evidence taken on oath?
Mr. Bennet
conceived this interruption to be uncalled for.
Mr. Wynn
observed, that unauthenticated papers could not be read except with the permission of the House.
Mr. Grenfell.
—I wish, for my own information, and that of the House, to know on what authority this evidence rests.
Mr. Alderman Wood
answered, that these documents were copies of depositions, many of which had been laid before lord Sidmouth, and were signed by the persons who gave the evidence. Those individuals were ready to swear to the truth of their statements. William Coudry stated that he attended several meetings when Edwards was present, and was informed by him, on one occasion, that a cabinet dinner was to be given at lord Westmoreland's, at which lord Castlereagh would be present. Edwards said, "the b—y Irish butcher must be made away with." Coudry stated also that he had often seen Edwards afterwards, and he was always preparing destructive instruments, Seymour staled, that he knew Edwards four or five, years. He met him some time ago, and he proposed that deponent should go to a meeting in Smithfield. He replied to Edwards that he would not go, for that he was not inclined to join in those bad pranks. Edwards afterwards told this man that the meeting had not turned out to their expectation. This, the hon. alderman observed, was a man of considerable respectability. Another man had seen Edwards at a coffeehouse, in June, and was told by him that the only means was, to destroy his majesty's ministers by throwing hand-gre-
247
248
l.
l.
249
Sir R. Wilson,
in seconding the motion, could not withhold his tribute of praise to the worthy alderman, to whose vigilance and attention to the public interests the country was so much indebted. He hoped that his majesty's ministers would not, on consideration, object to the motion. The more particularly as it would afford them an opportunity of vindicating themselves from the reproach of being connected with this Edwards, as well as from the mysterious circumstance of his not having been put either to the bar or in the jury box. He was not in England when the trial took place, but he had not since his return, conversed with any man who did not deplore the, circumstance of that person not having been brought forward, either as a culprit or a witness. It appeared that one of the sheriffs, accompanied by another gentleman, waited on lord Sidmouth, requesting that he might be called as a witness. He was not prepared to say that spies were not necessary under certain circumstances, but he must say, that an organised spy system was most abominable. If ministers were prepared to say, that the state of this, country was such as to require an organized
250
251
Mr. Bankes
said, that such a motion ought to be supported either by some case of precedent, or some analogy in other times; or it ought to be founded on the urgent necessity of the case. The worthy alderman had not established any grounds applicable to either of those descriptions. The motion was totally inconsistent with every thing he understood constantly to belong to the functions of that House. It was a motion for a secret committee to inquire into the degree of criminality in an individual person. Anything so extraordinary, so anomalous, as the degree of criminality in an individual, he had never heard proposed for inquiry in that House. He had always expressed, when inquiries of certain kinds were proposed, how cautious the House should be in tradeing on judicial grounds. Judicial inquiries could never be conducted by that House, either with honour to itself, or success in eliciting truth. What powers had that House for the purpose of judicial inquiry? Was there any thing of so little weight as evidence given either at the bar, or before a committee of that
252
253
254
255
Mr. Hobhouse
addressed the House for the first time, as follows:—
Mr. Speaker
; I feel it incumbent upon me to state shortly my reasons for voting for a motion which, as it has been characterized as senseless, stupid, and absurd, cannot, it appears, be supported without some excuse; and in so doing, I am aware that it is necessary to intreat the House to grant to me the indulgence usually bestowed upon a young member. Indeed I cannot conceal from myself—I cannot conceal from others—that these are peculiar circumstances attending my position here, which make it more than commonly requisite to lay claim to the patience, the attention, and even the candour of the House, whilst I endeavour to explain my sentiments upon a question on which such division of opinion seems likely to prevail [Hear, hear!]. My embarrassment is increased also, since I venture to oppose a gentleman of experience so tried, and of character so high, both in this House and in the country, as the hon. member who has just sat down, and has given opinions so diametrically opposite to those which I venture to entertain. But, unless I am mistaken in every point of view in which I have been able to consider tin's subject—unless I am totally unable to distinguish between right and wrong—unless I have mis-read all the records of this House and of the country, this question is such as an English House of Commons not only should not reject without examination, but is bound seriously to entertain. The hon. member has told us, that this House should not meddle with the criminal jurisdiction of the courts of law. The position, generally speaking, may be admitted—for who does not see that much mischief must ensue from the interference of the makers with the administrators of the laws? And yet it is undeniable that there are many precedents for this interference—it is undeniable that the House of Commons has, in various
256
257
258
259
"inter adversa temporum"
"Princcps qui delatores non castigat, irritat."
260
Mr. Butterworth
stated to the House, that one individual who had been seduced into the late plot, not by Edwards, but by one of his own neighbours (in consequence of reading seditious publications), and who bore a good character theretofore, had repented of his conduct; and having communicated his situation to a friend of his, his friend advised him to go before a magistrate and disclose all he knew of the transactions. Having been introduced to him (Mr. B.),and frankly disclosed the whole of what he knew; he (Mr. B.) brought him before a magistrate; but so terrified was he, that he would not on any account, allow his name to be disclosed—it was notdisclosed. Having been apprised of the present motion he (Mr.B.) sent for him, that day and asked him whether he knew Edwards? He replied, that he knew nothing of Edwards since the execution of Thistlewood and his companions. One of the persons implicated in that transaction had reminded him that Edwards attended some of the early meetings, but he did not see him attend any of the late meetings of the conspirators. He (Mr. B.) asked the man whether it was necessary that such a person as Edwards should persuade to acts of violence? He replied by saying "do you suppose we were children?"—The men engaged were men of firmness and understanding, and they were most desperate in the business; at one of their meetings it was observed, that the servants of the ministers were not involved in their masters' guilt, and therefore ought not to be murdered; but the proposal to spare the servants was opposed, as it was said to be sometimes necessary
261
Mr. Hume
expressed himself surprised that the hon. member who had last spoken could impute such improper motives to the hon. alderman who had introduced this question. The conduct of that worthy alderman was as upright and proper as that of the hon. member himself, or any other member in that House. The hon. alderman had acted in situations where that conduct was tried—in.a situation which he (Mr. Butterworth) had not been in, and he was always found humanely attentive to all its duties. Was it to be called a crime in him to endeavour to come at truth? He conceived it was not, and that the objection of the honourable member amounted to nothing at all.—It was too much to attribute improper motives to an hon member for an attempt to come at the truth. [Hear, hear! and laughter from the ministerial benches.] Gentlemen might laugh if they pleased. He was, however, sorry to find such a disposition on the present occasion.—It was different when any matter was brought forward in which ministers were interested; then they were all ear, and gave every, attention. He could not conceive why the; House should refuse inquiry on this important question. In an official despatch from the government of Bengal it was stated, in strong terms that there was the amplest evidence to prove that a person, employed as a spy had devised the robbery and murder of which he afterwards convicted the unhappy person who was seduced by his instigations. The hon. alderman had shown that Edwards, accompanied by his brother, had brought
262
263
Mr. Wynn
said, that for the number of years that he had sat in the House, he had never heard a motion brought forward on such extraordinary grounds as the present, unless it was, indeed, the former motion of the hon. alderman to proceed against an individual for a breach of privilege, which consisted in a plan to blow up the House; on which ground, he supposed, Guy Fawkes must also have been guilty of a breach of privilege. It had been said, that in similar cases, when his majesty's ministers had to complain of machinations against themselves, similar committees had been appointed. He had never heard of any such committees appointed on account of machinations against the ministers—they were not appointed to gratify the curiosity of the public, but always, as far as his experience went, to lay the ground of legislative proceedings. Who were the witnesses in this case? Men, no one of whom had done the duty of loyal subjects, and given information of the nefarious designs which had been unbosomed to them. It was said this did not lessen the guilt of Edwards, but did it not lessen their credibility? The case was, there was a plot, of which this person had given information. Was it not likely that those who were implicated in that plot and not tried, would, out of policy, as those who were found guilty would, from revenge, seek to invalidate the testimony, and discredit the character of the informer? Was it not common in
264
Mr. Denman
said, it was impossible not to observe, that the opinion which he and some of his friends near him had formed on the subject before them was disagree-
265
266
267
268
The Attorney General
said, the grounds on which the hon. and learned gentleman had proposed to vote for the motion of the worthy alderman were new, and wholly distinct from those on which the hon. members who preceded him had given it their support. The worthy alderman in bringing forward his motion proposed to inquire into the conduct of Edwards, but disclaimed all intention of imputing blame to the government for the use they had made of that person. His hon. and learned friend supported the motion on the ground that the government was wrong in employing him, which: he had assumed without a tittle of proof, and; then he came to the conclusion that he had seduced the late conspirators into the commission of that crime for which they had suffered. He would state that Edwards had never been employed by the government as a spy, and it was not in that character that he furnished that information which had enabled ministers to defeat one of the most horrible plots that had ever been formed. He would ask his hon. and learned friend, if he could suppose that Edwards had seduced Thistlewood and his associates, after reading
269
270
271
272
273
274
Sir Francis Burdelt
said, that he should occupy the attention of the House but for a very short time. If ever a speech was made which tended to support a motion it was meant to oppose, it was the speech of the hon. and learned gentleman who had just sat down. If all was so clear as he had insisted, where could be the objection to adopting an inquiry, in order to satisfy the doubts which existed in the public mind. If the whole country agreed in taking the same view that the attorney-general had expressed, they might then say with truth that there ought to be no inquiry; but when the public mind was strongly agitated with very different impressions, no simple vote of the House of Commons, nothing but substantial proof, nothing but accurate investigation could satisfy them, whatever statements the attorney-general might offer to their consideration. He had given one reason, which, was in itself a powerful argument against his own advice; lie had stated that there were other persons, and those not few, connected with the conspiracy—persons of importance and wealth in the country. Such was the way in which he understood the hon. and learned gentleman, and if that was his meaning, the propriety of going into a committee could no longer be denied. The hon. and learned gentleman had stated other points in which he was not borne out by fact. There could be no doubt as to the object of the unhappy persons engaged in the conspiracy, or as to the
275
276
277
278
Mr. Canning
was so satisfied with the state in which the question had been left by the speeches on the other side of the House, and by the speech of his hon. and learned friend, that he had determined not to take any part in this debate, and was only induced to abandon that determination by the speech of the hon. baronet; which had given an entirely different character to the discussion. The worthy alderman proposed that a committee should be appointed to inquire into the conduct of an individual, with a view of bringing that individual to justice, and was so far from accusing the government, that he called upon ministers to give him their assistance, hut they now found that it was considered by the hon. baronet that the motion Was a motion against ministers, and that the result of the inquiry proposed would probably prove, not only that Edwards was criminal, but establish guilt against the government itself. Under this imputation, he thought it would be as inexcusable in him to be silent as it would have been in-excusable under different circumstances
279
prima facie
prima facie
280
pro tanto
281
282
283
284
argumenti grati.â
285
Sir F. Burdett
rose to explain. He by no means meant to reply to the many stupid, absurd, and senseless exaggerations which the right hon. gentleman had been guilty of with regard to his (sir F. Burdett's) sentiments. In the list of his absurdities it had been represented that if his own house were on fire, and the lives of his own family dependent on the steps he should take in such a case he would hesitate to receive, or to act upon the information of an accomplice in the mischief! He had only blamed government for keeping in constant pay a regular set of spies, who insidiously went about the country for the purpose of fomenting discontents and planning conspiracies in order to inveigle the unwary into the snares of the law. He would not retract what he had said; and under this explanation he would repeat that the right hon. gentleman's logic was most absurd, ridiculous, and senseless.
Mr. Canning
did not think he had misrepresented the hon. baronet. He did not think so before the hon. baronet last rose: nor did the explanation of the hon. baronet alter his opinion. He had never said that the hon. baronet contended for the rejection of evidence after detection.
286
Sir F. Burdett
begged pardon for such frequent interruptions, but, before the discussion proceeded, he should like to hear from the right hon. gentleman, what he meant when he said his (sir F. Burdett's) "man?" The right hon. gentler man he thought was full of levity that night. He had accused a worthy alderman of being drunk with popularity; but> for his part, he thought the right hon. gentleman was himself drunk with insolence.
Mr. Canning
observed, that the hon. baronet saw and heard not only what was, but also what was not. He distinctly disavowed having used the expression that the worthy alderman was "drunk with popularity." As to his having given to an hon. friend of the hon. baronet's the title of the hon. baronet's "man," it was an expression which he had met with in some speeches made in Westminster during the late vacation, and which he had read in the same way as the hon. baronet might perhaps have read his (Mr. Canning's) speeches on a similar occasion at Liverpool.
Mr. Brougham
assured the House that he should occupy their attention but for a few moments, as he had nothing very material to the question to offer, although he differed from the views of his friends near him, by whom the motion was supported as well as from the opinions of the gentlemen opposite, by whom that motion was opposed. He stood in such a situation, that he had to vindicate himself against the observations of both, which he hoped he should be found to do upon some interchange of explanation. As to the remark which the attorney-general was understood to have made, namely, that money was furnished to the late conspirators by some persons of consequence, upon that remark, as it was explained by the right hon. member for Liverpool, he was not disposed to dwell. But there was a remark from the right hon. gentleman himself, with regard to which he felt it necessary to call for some explanation, in: order to prevent any erroneous impression from going forth to the country. Observing that the right hon. gentleman had left the House, he should wait for the explanation he required until his return, being persuaded that he should obtain a satisfactory explanation from the candour of the right bon. gentleman; he meant as to that passage in the right hon. gentleman's speech, in which he was understood to say
287
288
Mr. Canning
answered in the negative, adding, that he was not conscious of making such an observation as would imply that he believed in the existence of any approbation of a doctrine that might be as inconvenient to their successors, as to those who at present held the offices alluded to.
Mr. Brougham
observed, that the right
289
noli prosequi
The Attorney General,
in explanation, stated, that in saying the late conspirators were supplied with money from other quarters, hp by no means intended to allude to any persons of particular consequence. But those persons who gave the money were fully known to government; and when he expressed a wish that they should be aware of that fact, he meant that it should be communicated to them through the usual channels, by which the public became acquainted with the public became acquainted with the proceedings of the House.
Mr. Alderman Wood,
that as he had been charged in a very unhandsome manner by a right hon. gentle-
290
291
Mr. Canning
said, he understood the worthy alderman wished to withdraw the motion; he therefore took the opportunity of stating, that he, for one, would not suffer the motion to be withdrawn.
292
Sir Robert Wilson
said, that it could not fail to have been observed by the House that some warm words had passed between certain honourable members in the course of that debate. It would be much to be regretted if the House should break up without the satisfaction of knowing that those words, so uttered in the heat of the moment, had, in fact, made no unpleasant impresssion on the minds of the parties, who, he hoped, would therefore gratify the House, by manifesting the absence of any feeling contrary to that amicable understanding with which it was customary to conduct the discussions in that House [Hear, hear!].
The Speaker
rose amidst loud cries of Hear, hear! He was satisfied, he said, that there could be but one feeling of thankfulness in that House towards the hon. and gallant member for the observations that had just proceeded from him; and he was equally sure, that if any expressions, conjured up by the warmth of debate, had fallen from any honourable members, they would be very ready to give the House that satisfaction, which the hon. and gallant member had so handsomely and so properly solicited [Here a pause of several seconds ensued]. The Speaker at length again rose. The hon. and gallant member, he observed, in addressing the House at first, had not pointed so distinctly to the objects of his speech as to name the members to whom he alluded. He, therefore, now felt it to be his duty to say, that he understood the allusion to apply to sir Francis Burdett and Mr. Canning.
Sir F. Burdett
then rose, and stated, that he considered it his duty to say what he did. It occurred to him that the right hon. gentleman had said, that the worthy alderman was drunk with popularity [a cry of No, no!]. He did not mean to say that the right hon. gentleman used the express words, but certainly he took the meaning to be, that the worthy alderman was intoxicated with popularity. The words he used in consequence of that impression were not intended to be personal.
Mr. Canning
said, he had not taken any thing amiss which had fallen from the hon. baronet. He had only replied to him as the advocate of the hon. alderman's motion. There certainly were no two persons at greater variance on the subject of politics than the hon. baronet and himself; but there was no member he more
293
The Speaker
observed, that he was happy to find there was no ground for the supposed irritation of the feelings of the hon. members.
The question was then put, and the motion was negatived.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, May 11, 1820.
NEW POST OFFICE.]
Sir. W. Curtis
presented the report of the committee to whom had been referred for consideration the petition from the lord mayor, aldermen, and corporation of London, praying to be allowed to raise a further sum for the completion of the improvements at the west end of the city. The hon. baronet moved, That the report be referred to a committee of the whole House."
Mr. H. Sumner
objected to this proposition. The sum of 240,000
l.
l.
l.
s.
d,
That the report be referred to," for the purpose of substituting the following:—"A select committee, to whom it shall be referred to examine the accounts of the sums already expended, and to examine the estimates on which the additional grant is required."
Sir W. Curtis
had no sort of objection to send the accounts to a select committee, but it appeared to him that such a proceeding, on the report of another com-
294
Mr. Alderman Wood
had no objection to the motion for sending the accounts to a select committee for examination. The hon. member for Surrey had frequently touched on the subject of the duty on coals, but had never been able to make a successful impression on the House. What would be the effect of the present proposition on the hon. gentleman's constituents? That some thirty years hence they would pay a shilling a chaldron more for their coals than at present! That for which they would so pay, would be also as great an advantage to them as to other people. Instead of the narrow confined streets in which coaches and carts were now sometimes detained for two or three hours, fine wide streets would be opened, a circumstance which had no connexion with the new post-office. This street would show St. Paul's in a nobler point of view than it had been yet seen from the north road.
The amendment was agreed to, and a select committee appointed.
WOOL TAX.]
Mr. Stuart-Wortley
presented a petition from the manufacturers and other inhabitants, residing in one of the most populous places in the manufacturing district of the West Riding of Yorkshire, the parish of Kirkheaton, complaining of distress, and attributing that distress principally to the duties on wool. He would read to the House a paragraph from the petition, to show the severe nature of the distress experienced, premising that the petition came from persons as well-disposed to the support of government as the inhabitants of any part of the island. The hon. gentleman read the passage in question, which declared that the distress of the petitioners was great beyond example, and that they could not better illustrate its severity than by a reference to the state of the poorer manufacturers in the parish of seven or eight thousand, of whom 1700 had on an average earned, during the present year, only 11½ a week each. The petitioners prayed that the House would take the state
295
Ordered to be printed.
COVENTRY ELECTION—PETITION OF WILLIAM COBBETT.]
Mr. Butterworth
presented a Petition from William Cobbett, lately a Candidate for the city of Coventry, setting forth.
296
297
Ordered to be taken into consideration on the 29th of June.
EXCHEQUER BILLS.]
Mr. Maberly
rose for the purpose of making the mo-
298
l.
l.
299
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l,
l.
l.
300
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
301
l.
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he should not discharge his duty to the country by prematurely entering into an explanation of his financial arrangements. he was aware that much anxiety existed
302
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. J. Smith
expressed his disapprobation of the system of finance lately adopted by the right hon. gentleman. It had fallen within his knowledge, that considerable sums had been vested in foreign countries, in consequence of the alarm felt from the insecurity of our present system. There was nothing more necessary than the establishment of a permanent system of finance; as long as our present system was persevered in, so long would surmises, doubts, and alarms exist in the public mind. If it should be found necessary to impose any new tax, he hoped it would be levied on those who were best able to pay it. He could not help saying,
303
Mr. Baring
was as anxious as any other honourable member could be to see a definite and permanent policy adopted; to see, indeed, the country in an independent situation, which it never could be in its present financial circumstances. We were, however, so peculiarly placed, that it was very difficult to estimate correctly, our own resources. He made this remark in candour and fairness to the right hon. gentleman. Though sorry to learn it, as a matter of information, he could easily conceive why a deficiency should have taken place upon the last quarter. What he dreaded was, lest the same uncertainty should attach to every future estimate of our revenue. Nothing, however, could be calculated on, without a greater degree of quiet and subordination than at present existed. In the present unfortunate state of the country, he was averse to any decisive measure, till he could see the strength of our means. Labouring, as we did, under a want of credit and of confidence, from the state of the country, he did not think that any decisive measure could at present be proposed. There was, indeed, plenty of money in the country; but would there be such a depression of stock, if there was not a want of confidence? If there were a sinking fund of 5,000,000
l.
304
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that Mr. Pitt's draughts in Hamburgh were of quite a different description. The draughts at present circulated abroad were made applicable to funds abroad. In a few months he would wind up the whole account, and then present to the House regular accounts of all.
Mr. Grenfell
said a few words respecting large quantities of silver imported into this country, and large draughts on the treasury of this country, arising from such imports.
Mr. Baring
said, that it was quite sufficient for him to hear the intention of the right hon. gentleman to present the accounts. If the right hon. gentleman had general bonds for money outstanding on the continent, he would say, as far as he knew the subject, that it was a measure extremely objectionable; and he had heard that there were draughts at three months circulated all over the continent.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that those draughts were for silver imported into this country.
Sir John Newport
said, that he could never consent to the strengthening of the funds at the expence of the community. If the funds were improved by fresh burdens on the country, that would be improving them at the expense of the other interests of the community. The stockholder already received increased value, for be had become a stockholder during a depreciated currency, and now he received increased value by means of the meliorated currency. No sacrifice ought to be made of the great interests of the country for the benefit of the stock-holder. The commercial and agricultural interests were already in great difficulty, and their difficulties seemed not to be diminishing. He therefore must protest against any improvement of the funds, at the expense of the landholder.
Mr. Maberly,
in reply, assured the House that his observations were not made with a view to profit the fundholder, but to benefit the country at large. He was anxious to see a permanent sinking fund established, and our financial system placed on a sound and permanent footing. He begged to assure the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that he had no wish to pry into his financial arrangements; on the contrary, he was aware that any premature disclosure of them would be injurious,
305
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, May 12, 1820.
PETITION OF THE REV. MR. JONES—ATHANASIAN CREED.]
Lord Hollandrose
to present to their lordships a petition from the Rev. Pike Jones, curate of North Boney in the county of Devon. Before entering on the principal subject to which he had to call their lordships attention, he felt it necessary to say a few words on two other points connected therewith. The first related to the time at which the petition in question was brought before their lordships; the second to the mode of redress adopted by the petitioner. With respect to the first their lordships might, unless some explanation were offered, justly inquire why they were now, for the first time, called on to consider and afford relief for an injury alleged to be committed a considerable time since. The transaction to which the petition related took place in September last; and he felt it due to the petitioner, as well as to himself, to account for the delay of which he might otherwise be accused. The fact was, that in November the petition was put into the hands of a noble lord, whose love of liberty and the constitution was only equalled by the ability and eloquence he displayed in their support—he meant his noble friend earl Grey. Before some inquiries which were considered indispensable were complete, that noble lord's indisposition unfortunately took place. The business was then referred to him (lord Holland), but the short duration of the session, and he having been also subject to indisposition, rendered it impossible to bring the subject sooner before their lordships. He stated these things merely that the delay might be accounted for, and that the time at which the petition was presented might not operate to the prejudice of the petitioner. As to the second point the petitioner was driven to bring his case under the consideration of the House, because he had understood from persons well-informed on the subject that he had no remedy at law. With respect to the course he was about to pursue, he confessed it would certainly have been more consistent with the usual practice if he had merely introduced it, moved that it be laid on the table, and afterwards have founded some motion on it. But he
306
307
l.
ex parte;
308
309
310
311
nilla extra ecclesiam salus.
312
313
314
quare impedit?
mandamus
quare impedit,
mandamus
315
316
317
318
The Bishop of Exeter
said, he should not enter into the detailed part of the noble lord's speech, as he felt himself only called upon to enter into the allegations of the petition as they referred personally to himself. It was unpleasant for him to occupy their lordships attention as he must do, but he trusted they would afford him that indulgence which they were always pleased to bestow upon any one who had never before addressed them. He admitted the facts of the ordination, and the calling of the public meeting, though he was surprised to hear it stated, that he had refused to make any inquiry into the case. He could not, however, but animadvert on the allegation of the petitioner countenanced by the noble mover, that he {the bishop of Exeter) had refused to countersign the certificate, because the petitioner had made a speech at a county meeting in favour of additional privileges to the Roman Catholics. This he (the rev. prelate) unequivocally denied. The circumstances of the case were the following:—The petitioner having, as stated in his petition, been presented to two livings, which by the by, were only to be held for seven years, applied to him to countersign his certificate, of character. This practice of applying to the diocesan for such signature was very ancient and he believed never departed from. When the petitioner applied, and presented his certificate, he (the bishop of Exeter) had some conversation with him. He told him that he knew his opinions, respecting the Catholic question; and that he believed them to be sincere; their opinions differed widely on that subject; but he desired him particularly to understand that this difference had nothing to do with the refusal to sign his certificate. At the same time he expressed a hope that he might meet with the same indulgence from him, which he was certainly most willing to extend towards him. And here he could not avoid alluding to that part of the noble lord's speech, in which he supposed that the line of conduct which he felt it his duty to adopt would have the effect of preventing the clergy from exercising their
319
320
Lord Erskine
gave credit to the right reverend lord for the purity of his intentions, though he thought his conduct in the present instance was properly brought under the view of the House. He had seen many testimonials, and never saw one differ from another, and contended that the testimonials were only required to be signed by those who knew the clergyman, and it was not necessary that the clergyman himself should be known to the diocesan. The manner in which those testimonials were conducted was familiar to all. He believed no one would contradict him, when he stated that they were of this kind. They generally ran in the following words:—"We the undersigned do testify that we personally know for the last three years, that we believe him to be a person of moral conduct, and that he does not maintain any doctrines contrary to those of the Church of England." What had fallen from the rev. prelate was correct, that the testimonial was not to the effect of giving the person in whose favour it was signed general credit, but it went to that credit which ought to entitle him to that presentation he sought. It frequently happened that a clergyman was promoted, who did not know three clergymen in the diocese. A son of his had been in that situation, but the signature of one being procured, the archbishop of Canterbury signified that he was worthy of credit; the bishop of Chichester did the same, though they knew nothing of his
321
The Lord Chancellor
who spoke in
322
The Earl of Carnarvon
wished their lordships to consider this question, not as one of a personal nature, but as involving a principle of great and general importance. It was with much pain, that he had heard a question of so great practical importance passed over in so superficial a manner, and the speech of his noble friend (lord Holland) answered in the manner it had been by the learned prelate who was the object of the present motion. The learned prelate had assigned no reason for having refused to countersign the testimonials of the petitioner, and for having consequently destroyed his character, ruined his fortune, and blasted his hopes of professional honour and preferment. The right rev. prelate had moreover told them what he thought no man would have dared tell their lordships, that
323
324
325
The Marquis of Lansdowne
said, that after what their lordships had heard and in the absence of any explanation of his extraordinary conduct, as stated by the learned prelate himself, he thought that no doubt could remain on their minds as to the necessity of some farther investigation. He would briefly call the attention of the House to-the authority claimed by the learned prelate over the clergy of his diocese, and to the manner in which he had exercised that jurisdiction. The learned prelate contended that he was authorised to receive accounts respecting an individual within his jurisdiction, not from persons residing in the same quarter with that individual, nor respecting the manner in which he discharged his professional duties, but from persons in distant parts, and relative to matters of fact and words, said to be used, perhaps inadvertently, by that individual; and, on this testimony, collected from persons not acquainted with the general habits of the individual in question, and not impeaching his general conduct or his moral character, the learned prelate thought himself warranted to inflict a punishment, which must inevitably be attended with ruin of character and fortune. Persons in the exalted situation of the right rev. prelate might overlook all views of further promotion [Hear, hear!]; for they were to suppose that he, as a bishop, did not look for or expect further church prefer-
326
l.
l.
l.
l.
327
328
The Bishop of Landaff
(Dr. Van Mildert) said, that giving credit to the feelings of the noble lords opposite upon this subject, he could not yet be insensible to the arduous task of those who had the care and government of ecclesiastical districts. From all he had heard, he did not think that any case of misgovernment was made out against the right rev. prelate. What he had done appeared to him to be only in the strict discharge of his duty. He complained that little attention had been paid either to the feelings of the right rev. prelate, or to the painful nature of the duty he had to perform. With respect to the alleged opinions of the clergy on the subject alluded to, he had passed through all ranks, and he thought it a gross libel to say that nine-tenths of the clergy did not believe the Athanasian creed, although they signed the articles. The right rev. prelate might inadvertently or unwittingly countersign testimonials; but if before he had so done, any circumstances came to his knowledge respecting the character or opinions of the individual, he was bound to act upon them [The conclusion of the right rev. I prelate's speech was wholly inaudible below the bar].
The Earl of Carnarvon,
in explanation, stated, that he had not charged the right rev. prelate with a disbelief of the damnatory articles of the Athanasian creed; but the right rev. prelate had not himself expressed any opinion on the subject. Another right rev, prelate had, in his writings, thrown more than a doubt on the necessity of their belief. Indeed he (lord Carnarvon) had never heard any prelate say, that he believed them; and all that he should add was, that they who did believe them could not be Christians.
The Bishop of Exeter
was proceeding, we suppose, to comment upon what had fallen from the noble earl, when.
Lord Holland
rose to order. His lordship observed, that, according to the standing rules and constant practice of their lordships, if any noble lord, in explanation, disavowed particular words, no noble lord had a right afterwards to impute those words to him. The question;
329
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, May 12, 1820.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.]
Earl Temple presented six petitions from the occupiers of land in the county of Buckingham, complaining of the depressed state of the agricultural interests, and praying for inquiry. On the motion for their being laid on the table,
Mr. Hume
stated, that observing the daily increase of these petitions, he could not avoid saying, that they appeared to him calculated to aggravate the general distress, by calling at such a time for the imposition of additional restrictions on the importation of grain. Could any man acquainted with the country, propose any measure more likely to increase the notorious sufferings of the commercial and manufacturing classes? The extent of those sufferings required of that House to give the fill up to industry, by the removal of all commercial restrictions; and he was the more surprised at the course to which these petitioners manifestly inclined, when it was recollected that the late corn law had altogether failed, as a measure of relief to the body for which it was intended.
Mr. Curwen
observed, that the hon. member was quite mistaken in his representation of the objects of the petitioners. Had lie given himself the trouble to attend to the allegations of the many that had been already presented, he would have found that they abstained from stating any specific measure of relief, but prayed generally for an inquiry. Was that inquiry to be refused by the House? He trusted not; and when it took place, he was convinced it would appear that the object was not to put money into the pockets of the landlord or the farmer, but to enable them to give employment to labour. In the present distressed state of the agricultural interest, he knew, and he said it with pain, that it was made the object of both the landlord and the farmer, to abstract rather than to employ labour. He should be very sorry that any premature discussion on the subject should take place, and therefore he regretted that a gallant and honourable member had on a former night sounded an alarum on the question. There could be no separate
330
General Gascoyne
contended that the hon. member, who wished too often to discuss a public question in detail, had either not heard him, or had misunderstood him. In place of sounding any alarum, he had implored the House to pause before, in the present state of the public mind, when too many were irritated without cause, it afforded any ground for increasing that agitation. What other object could these petitions all drawn up in a similar manner, and all complaining of the importation of corn have, but to raise the price of that necessary article? He had that day received a letter from a most respectable manufacturer in the neighbourhood of Manchester, requesting his opinion of the propriety of calling meetings and of petitioning, for the purpose of meeting these agricultural petitions. His answer was, that it would be better to wait until the objects of the petitioners were a little better defined.
Sir J. Newport
considered that the gallant general had not a little contributed to that agitation which he deplored, having taken, in the earliest stage, the opportunity of giving a very decisive opinion on the object of the petitioners. He trusted the doors of that House would never be closed against any class of the people who conceived themselves aggrieved, whenever they approached it with temperate and respectful language. He deprecated the doctrine, that the agricultural body had a separate interest from the rest of the community. Believing the home market to be the most beneficial, the manufacturers had an equal interest in the prosperity of agriculture.
Earl Temple
said, that the petitioners asked only for inquiry; they did not presume to point out the means.
Mr. Ricardo
was not disposed to refuse inquiry to the petitioners, though he thought,
331
Mr. Calcraft
hoped that as long as petitioners approached that House in moderate and respectful language, their application for inquiry would be attended to. When the measure for increasing the importation price of corn was under the consideration of parliament, he had voted against it, but though he did not feel himself bound by that conduct to oppose inquiry, he never had conceived that this question could not be viewed as one in which the interests were divided. Agriculture and commerce had an equal and a common interest in their respective prosperity. It was also to be recollected, that the whole burthen of the poor was thrown upon the agricultural interest. That his hon. friend who spoke last, had, on a former evening, admitted to be a question worthy of investigation. Was it not right then to ascertain whether any relief could be afforded, even on that point?
Lord Nugent
stated, that he could vouch for the unequivocal respectability of the petitioners. In their allegations as to the poor laws, he agreed with them; in many other respects he differed with them, most particularly as to the extension of the principle by which the price of corn was raised. Such an unnatural increase directly went to raise the price of labour, and add to the pressure of the poor-rates. It was, however, not to be denied, that the distress amongst the occupiers of land was excessive. Many farmers, who were in possession of property, were actually living on their capital, and those who had saved nothing, or but a little, were totally ruined. The country in fact, at the present hour, laboured under a stagnation of all its leading interests. The causes were, to him, plain and obvi-
332
Mr. Huskisson
deprecated the continuance of any premature discussion on a question which every member must feel to be one of peculiar delicacy. He: therefore suggested that the similar petitions which were to be presented should be allowed to be placed on the table with out discussion, particularly as an hon.; member had already given notice of a motion on these petitions for a future day.
Ordered to lie on the table.
REFORM OF PARLIAMENT.]
Sir M. W. Ridley
said, he held in his hand a petition from the merchants, bankers, and tradesmen, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, in favour of parliamentary reform. The petition was signed by 3016 persons, and for the respectability of their characters he could vouch his own personal knowledge. The meeting at which the petition was agreed to was conducted with the greatest quietness and unanimity. It was the first meeting held under the restrictive laws passed by the last parliament. It sprung from that middle class of life, the respectability of whose characters and station placed their motives beyond suspicion. These petitioners looked for the correction of the evils under which the country now suffered, to a shortening of the duration Of parliaments, to the extension of the suffrage from decayed and notoriously dependent and corrupt boroughs to populous towns. The latter principle had been already acted upon, and he hailed it as a preliminary step in the successful progress of a constitutional reform in the representation. The petitioners begged not to be considered as the advocates of any mischievous doctrines—such as universal suffrage and annual parliaments.
Mr. Lambton
concurred with the hon. baronet in stating, that the petitioners mere most respectable individuals. They principally belonged to that class of society which had not hitherto taken so great a share in the consideration of public affairs, as he was persuaded it would be highly advantageous to the country they should do—he meant the middle class.
333
CIVIL LIST—PETITION FROM LIVERPOOL.]
Lord Sefton
presented a petition from the merchants, housekeepers, and other inhabitants of Liverpool. It was signed by nearly 400 individuals of the highest respectability. The petitioners stated, that they observed that a bill had been brought into the House for the regulation of the civil list, and the}' hoped, that in proceeding to the consideration of that object, the House would bear in mind the existing national distress. The petitioners particularly adverted to the subject of pensions, and described the bad effect on the public mind arising from the lavish and indiscriminate manner in which they were bestowed. They hoped that the amount and disposition of these pensions would be clearly defined by parliament; and they also hoped it might be made the law of the land, that no part of the pension fund should ever be granted
334
Mr. Bennet
took that opportunity of giving notice, that whenever the civil list bill should come into the committee, he would propose the introduction of a clause, providing, that members of the House of Commons who should receive from the Crown any such grants as those alluded to in the petition, should vacate their seats.
Ordered to lie on the table.
CONDUCT OF THE MILITARY AT OLDHAM.]
Mr. Hobhouse
rose to present a petition from certain inhabitants of Oldham, the contents of which they prayed the House to take into their serious consideration. It appeared from the petition, that a series of military outrages, as the petitioners denominated them, had I recently been committed in the neighbourhood of Oldham. In the first place, he wished to state, that whether these were, or were not, exaggerated accounts of transactions which did not deserve the designation given to them, it was not possible for him to say; but, as far as he could collect information on the subject, he believed that every thing stated I in the petition was perfectly correct; and he would farther add, that there was nothing in the petition that was at all disrespectful to the House. It appeared, according to the petition, that the inhabitants of Oldham had, on two or three occasions, been subjected to the excesses of the military, who, immediately subsequent; to those excesses, had been removed, and replaced by others; in consequence of which, the inhabitants did not know who the soldiers were by whom they had been molested; and therefore they had not the means of procuring justice by a legal process. He understood that, most unfortunately, such a suspicion was entertained of the possibility of receiving justice at the hands of the magistrates, that the inhabitants would much rather go before the commanding officer than apply
335
Mr. H. Clive
wished to offer a few words on the subject of the petition, which, he believed, was drawn up by a person of some notoriety, who came from London, and was now connected with the Manchester Observer. That individual had, he understood, felt a strong inclination to charge the military with riotous behaviour. On the 25th of April, a sort of rejoicing took place at Oldham, and at one of the public-houses, where a number of the town people were assembled, there happened also to be a few of the military. A most improper toast was given by one of the former, on which the soldiers wished to withdraw, and they were grossly insulted. On the following day, the same toast was repeated at another alehouse. The obnoxious toast was, "May the skin of every loyal man be torn from his back, in order to make a drum for the reformers to beat to arms!" Was it possible, he would ask, for any person serving the king to hear such a toast without resenting it? There were only five or six soldiers in the room, and there were twenty of the inhabitants present, who attacked the military when they remonstrated on the impropriety of their conduct. One of the soldiers went out, in consequence, and called on his comrades to come and protect their companions from being murdered. In the mean time, the House was filled with townspeople, and about ten or fifteen soldiers procured admission, by breaking the pannels of the door, for they had been barricadoed out. They met with resistance, and they gave and received blows. There the business ended; but individuals in the town made the matter of more importance than it really was, and
336
Sir F. Burdett
said, that all that had been observed by the hon. gentleman was so very little to the purpose, in the present stage of the proceeding, that he certainly would not have risen, if it were not for the disposition which the hon. gentleman evinced to reject the petition. It appeared to him to be of very little importance who might or might not be the drawer up of that petition. And it would be most extraordinary, if, on a mere statement of the kind which the hon. gentleman had made to the House—a statement which he doubtless had received from some persons connected with the transaction—it should be decided, as a matter of course, that there was no ground for this complaint, which described an outrage affecting all the inhabitants of the town, and testified by 3,000 of them. It was of a more serious and important nature than the hon. gentleman seemed to suppose. It was indeed so important, that he hoped the House would not only receive the petition now, but would not let it remain long on their table, without instituting some inquiry into the facts. It appeared to him to be a subject of such magnitude, that he thought he should be hardly doing his duty to the country, if he did not call for an inquiry into the matters which that petition disclosed. He thought it was impossible for them to reject this petition, without any reason of any kind being given for such a proceeding—without even knowing the matter which it contained—merely from the statement of an hon. gentleman. When they were informed that the most weak and defenceless part of the community had attacked men who always had the power to overbear those whom they disliked, and who always, more particularly under the existing circumstances of the country, felt a strong inclination to use that power, they should listen to the assertion cautiously, and abstain from rejecting the petition on such a statement.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
had
337
Mr. Bootle Wilbraham
hoped that the motion of the hon. presenter would be agreed to; but in so desiring his object was different from that of the hon. baronet. He viewed the subject in a light very different from that in which the hon. baronet saw it. He wished the allegations of the petition should be known and canvassed, because he believed that the more they were known and canvassed, the less ground would there appear for the complaint. He believed the hon. gentleman (Mr. Clive) had stated the facts as they really were, and he trusted that the whole matter would go fairly before the public. They would be enabled to judge, from the reading of the petition, whether there was any good cause of complaint on the part of those individuals; and therefore he hoped the petition would be received.
Mr. H. Clive
said, he did not think there was any good ground for the complaint, and he had, under that impression, opposed the petition in the first instance.
Lord Milton
said, that the statement of the hon. gentleman opposite, and the sort of opposition the petition had met with, were, he conceived, most unfortunate. He could not help thinking, that those who made such statements, and offered such opposition, were consulting their feelings and passions, rather than their justice and discretion. Whether the statement of the hon. gentleman behind him, or that of the hon. secretary opposite, were the true one, mattered nothing. The complaint was of too grave and serious a nature not to call for the consideration of the House. He was surprised to hear the hon. member declare that he wished the petition to be received, with a view different from that of the hon. baronet, because it was a complaint which, when it had undergone investigation, would appear to be groundless. Investigation was all that was demanded; and he trusted it would be pursued further than a mere debate in that House. It was not the statement of one gentleman or of another—it was not what much oc-
338
The petition was brought up and read. On the motion that it should lie on the table,
Mr. B. Wilbraham
said, that having expressed his anxiety that the subject should be thoroughly investigated, in consequence of the various matters that had come to his knowledge with respect to it, he wished, in order to guard himself from the charge of inconsistency, to state, that now, having heard the petition read, he was of opinion that the allegations which it contained were not a fit subject for parliamentary inquiry.
Lord Milton
was unequivocally of opinion, that if a portion of the people had suffered any grievance for which the House could afford a remedy, it was then-duty to investigate its nature.
Ordered to be printed.
COMMERCIAL DISTRESS—PETITION FROM BIRMINGHAM.
Mr. Dugdale
rose to present a petition from the manufacturers and traders of Birmingham, stating the distress which prevailed in that town in consequence of the stagnation of trade. The petitioners observed, that the distress and inconvenience under which they laboured had existed for a considerable time, and would, they were afraid, go on increasing, unless some effectual remedy were found. They did not pretend to point out any remedy, but they seriously hoped that this House would institute a solemn inquiry into the causes of the prevailing distress. After what had occurred on a former evening he would not trouble the House with the details connected with this subject; but he believed that the account of the distress contained in the petition was not at all exaggerated. He had received statements from various* sources, all concurring in the magnitude of the distress which at present existed—a fact that was farther proved by the increase of the poor-rates in that quarter. There never was, he thought, a case that required more decidedly the interference Of parliament; and he trusted that, if any means could be devised for alleviating the sufferings of the people, that relief and that assistance would be rendered them as speedily as possible.
339
Mr. Brougham
said, that the petition was very numerously signed, and he believed a more respectable body of men did not exist than those whose complaints were now before the House. They were not persons connected with any particular political party; amongst them were to be found some who took one side in politics—some who took another. They were indeed the most respectable, and the most worthy of the attention of that House, of any of the members of the community to which they belonged. He was exceedingly anxious to support the motion, that they should have a hearing. But he could not help stating his own feeling, as he had done before the last recess, that a compliance with the prayer of their petition was not likely to be attended with any beneficial result. Not that he had the smallest kind of doubt of the facts stated in the petition; not that he did not believe that the distress of which they complained was deeply and widely spread over that district (he wished he was not justified in adding, that it extended also over all the rest of the country; but because, from marking the course of such a proceeding, he had come to an opinion which was firmly rooted in his mind—that a parliamentary inquiry instituted in that House, with a view to revising, altering, and amending commercial or agricultural concerns, was by no means the best mode that could be adopted for attaining the desired object. He conceived that ministers themselves, by their means of information, by the remedies which they might recommend to parliament, and which, above all, they could support by their influence, were the persons who should devise measures of this description. They presented the only rational means of affording substantial relief; and he was sorry to be obliged to add, that the present administration, from the view which they appeared to have taken with respect to the agricultural and commercial interest, and, indeed, with reference to every thing they had done on those great questions of political economy, were not very likely to go into an inquiry of this kind in such a spirit as the exigency of the times demanded. He must also add, if they did proceed to this inquiry, that the country must feel, looking to all their acts, and to the degree of confidence which they enjoyed, that they were not precisely that sort of government, who could, with a reasonable prospect of suc-
340
Mr. Spooner,
knowing the distress which the industrious manufacturers of Birmingham laboured under claimed the attention of the House while be offered a few observations. He meant when he came into the House to enter into a detailed statement of the distresses which prevailed in the country; but having heard what was said by the hon. member for Chichester, and the House appearing to feel with him the inconvenience of partial debates on such important subjects, he had come to a determination not to pursue the course he originally intended, and to that determination he would have adhered if it had not been for the most extraordinary reason which the learned member had just given to induce the House not to proceed with an inquiry. The learned gentleman had stated, that there, was not any party in that House fit to form an administration. This point, lie begged to observe, never entered the minds of the petitioners when they represented their grievances to parliament, in the only constitutional way which was open to, them. He hoped, therefore, the House would agree with him, that the reason given by the learned member was not sufficient to, induce them to refuse the prayer, of the petition—namely, to enter into full, deliberate, and solemn inquiry, as to the distressed state of the town and neighbourhood of Birmingham. He was sorry to hear the learned member say, that an inquiry so instituted would be of no use. He should feel deeply grieved if the opinion of the country agreed with that of the learned gentleman. For his own part, he relied with confidence on the wisdom of that House, and so likewise did the petitioners. They looked to parliament for assistance in this emergency, and-he trusted they
341
l.,
l.
342
Mr. Brougham,
in explanation, said, he had a right to complain of two misrepresentations which the hon. gentleman had made of his speech. He had in two instances wholly mistaken him. The hon. gentleman had talked as if he had said, that no party in that House could form a ministry. He had not stated any such thing. What he had said was, that the exigencies of the state at this moment called for most important measures; and that no ordinary ministry could meet that task satisfactorily, which could alone be effected by a ministry so constituted as to conciliate the whole country. In the second place, he never had called on the House to turn a deaf ear to the petitioners; He had said the very reverse. He had called on the House to turn their ear to them, with the assistance of those Who possessed great influence, and who could carry such measures as they thought fit—he meant his majesty's government. Let the petition be brought up; let it be laid oh the table; and he hoped it would lead his majesty's ministers to institute an inquiry on the subject.
Mr. Spooner,
in explanation, said, that he had merely alluded to the observations of the learned gentleman, with respect to the formation of an efficient administration, as a matter that had not at all entered the contemplation of the petitioners when they addressed the House.
Ordered to lie on the table.
343
CIVIL LIST BILL.]
On the order of the day for the second reading of this bill,
Sir R. Heron
said, he could not help expressing his gratitude to ministers for the forbearance they had manifested on tin's occasion. His majesty had in his speech from the throne, been graciously pleased to recommend economy. The distresses of the country loudly called for its adoption. The country was in such a situation, that it could with difficulty pay the interest of the national debt. And, under all these circumstances, what was the forbearance of ministers? Why, they simply contented themselves with fixing the civil list at the highest rate at which it had ever been—at a rate at which it stood when money was three times more plentiful than it was at this moment. They would have better consulted both the dignity of the Crown and the situation of the country, had they commenced a system of economy in that quarter where it could be enforced with so little comparative inconvenience. He feared that the ominous mention of the word "economy," in the royal speech, was only for the purpose of dispensing with it in practice. If this was so, ministers were responsible, and deserved the just indignation of the country [Hear!].
The bill was then read a second time. On the question that it be committed on Monday,
Mr. Hume
rose to enter his protest against the proceedings of ministers. He did not do so on the grounds which the hon. baronet had stated, because he was not prepared to say, that, if the expenditure of the household for the last five years were laid before parliament, the amount would appear to have been extravagant. If any thing could induce ministers to lay full information on the table of the House, before any money was voted, the statements made by an hon. gentleman on this side of the House, and by another hon. member on that side of the House, representing the difficulties and distress of the country, ought to have that effect. Yet ministers came forward and called upon the House to vote 850,000
l.
344
l.,
l.,
345
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the surplus of the third class had regularly been carried to the consolidated fund, and the accounts of the consolidated fund uniformly accounted for every such surplus. To that fund he referred the hon. gentleman for an account of this part of the civil list. A few days ago an order had been made for an account of all pensions, including the pensions to which the hon. gentleman had alluded. This account, would soon be laid before the House. Plate was usually given where official situations required greater display and splendor than the salary could afford. In general, presents of this kind were very moderate, and below the amount which the station of those to whom they were made might seem to require. Since the year 1816 services of plate had been given to all ambassadors to foreign courts, in order to enable them to support the dignity and splendor of representatives of the sovereign.
The bill was ordered to be committed on Monday.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, May 15, 1820.
WESTERN UNION CANAL BILL.]
Mr. C. Dundas
moved the second reading of this bill.
346
Mr. Bright
seconded the motion, and contended that it must prove eminently advantageous to the trade and navigation of the Thames, as well as to those parts of the country through which the intended canal was to flow.
Mr. Smith
moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months.
Mr. Alderman Wood
remarked that the sheriffs of London were in waiting with a petition against it, and professed his own opinion that the undertaking could lead to no other end than a sacrifice of capital on the part of those who embarked in it.
Mr. Lyttleton
condemned the proposed measure, as a gross violation of private property.
Mr. Baring
thought generally, that such undertakings were productive of benefit to the country, and that they ought to be patronised. He could see no reason to prevent the House from considering the present measure.
Lord F. Osborn
was of opinion that the good expected from the projected undertaking was not sufficiently extensive to induce the House to interfere with private property.
Lord Nugent
was in favour of going into the committee. He did not think that the interests of the persons complaining would be materially affected by this bill; and such being the case, the House had a right to consider the public advantages that were likely to be derived from it.
Mr. Philips
was of opinion, that the arguments in favour of going into the committee greatly outweighed those that were adduced against that proceeding.
Mr. P. Moore
observed, that those who were favourable to this measure had given up the idea of making a cut to Eton; but still the canal would come within one mile of that college, and very great inconvenience would be the consequence of its approaching a place where a great number of young persons received their education. A very unpleasant intercourse, prejudicial to the morals and manners of the students, would be the result. The provost and fellows of Eton had also a wharf, which produced a considerable profit; and they were of opinion that the advantages which they derived from that wharf would be lost if the canal were formed.
Mr Alderman Heygate
said, that the public advantage, and not private interest
347
Mr. Cripps
said, it had been stated that the city of London laid out large sums of money in improving the navigation of the Thames. If so, they had ex pended it to very little purpose; for goods were now six weeks, and even two months going down to that part of the; country where he resided. He would oppose a canal projected for mere speculative purposes, but he would support a measure which was likely to be so beneficial as the present.
Mr. Bennet
said, the city of London had not improvidently lavished their money in improving the navigation of the Thames. That part which was under their jurisdiction was very much improved.
Mr. Hart Davies
said, the projected canal would be a work of great public benefit. If they went into the committee, it would be found that the landholders were favourable to it.
Mr. Ascot
observed, that every person who traded between London and Bristol would be benefitted by the formation of the canal.
The House then divided: Ayes, 169; Noes, 136—Majority, 33. The bill was then ordered to be committed.
OLDHAM.]
Sir F. Burdett
gave notice that he should bring forward a motion for inquiry into the late transactions at Oldham.
BARONS OF THE EXCHEQUER IN SCOTLAND.]
Lord Archibald Hamilton
rose, in pursuance of notice, to move for a. copy of the late appointment of a fourth Baron of the Exchequer in Scotland, in opposition to the recommendation of the commissioners, who recommended the abolition of the office. It was unnecessary for him, on the present occasion to make any preface on the importance of the motion with which he meant to conclude. The importance of the subject in the present condition of the country, and in the present state of public feeling, must be generally allowed. If it had been necessary to excite attention to the dis-
348
349
350
351
352
l.
353
354
355
356
357
358
felo de se
359
360
The Lord Advocate
expressed a hope, that whatever might be thought of the merit of the opinion, which appeared from him, in the paper on the table, the House would do him the justice to believe that that opinion was his genuine and conscientious impression; and he trusted that the same credit would be given to those great authorities with whom he had the honour to concur, and who were best qualified to judge upon the subject. Whether the report on the table was true or not, he was certainly responsible for it. If he erred, he erred with those who were best qualified to give a judicial opinion in that country. The opinion in that report was founded on a due consideration of the national contract at the union of the two countries—an union which had proved satisfactory to the people, and promoted the interests of that part of the country, for more than a century. That contract was not to be wantonly broken in upon. This was the substance of the report. If any change should be made, it ought to be the result of deep deliberation, and till that deliberation could be bestowed on the subject, the numbers of the judges ought not to be reduced. The appointment now in question was known to have arisen from the circumstance that one of the barons had found his duties in the court of Exchequer incompatible with his duties as chief commissioner of the jury court. The jury court had been lately introduced into Scotland. No new judges had been appointed for this court, in order that, if the experiment should be found unsatis-
361
362
363
364
365
The Speaker
interposed. He suggested to the learned lord that no observations which might have been made by any hon. member ought to be called "an unfounded and illiberal attack," and that therefore the learned lord was not in order when he used the term.
366
The Lord Advocate
apologized for the expression, and assured the House, he had no intention of giving offence to any honourable member; he was only desirous, when he heard the name of an individual whom he so much respected called into question, that the evening of his life should close with the same consideration which his former conduct had always commanded. But he returned to the consideration of that commission to which he had principally called the attention of the House; and as to the commissioners, with all the respect and esteem which he entertained for them personally, he must say that with the exception of' the chief commissioner, he did consider them to be unqualified. One of them, after practising at the bar, went into the country and lived upon his estate, without returning to his practice; another went to India, and, after staying there for some time, returned, and lived almost entirely in the country; and a third, having also practised some time at the bar, retired to his estate, improved the country round it, but never returned to the profession. Such persons might be well qualified to report upon the fees and emoluments of the officers, but not upon the constitution of the court. But he did not rely only on the objection to the competency of these commissioners; he would appeal to the unanimous opinion of those who were most competent to decide; of the lord president, of the lord justice clerk, the lord commissioner of the jury court, above all, he relied on the authority of the lord chief baron, an individual who had gone so lately from this country, after acquiring a thorough and extensive knowledge of the whole body of the laws of these kingdoms, and whose special duty it was, if it were any one's, to say whether an appointment of this nature was or was not necessary. He did not know what authority the chief-baron's name might have there; but certain he was, that in his (the lord advocate's) part of the country, they felt grateful to his majesty's ministers for having sent among them a man whose talents as a judge were not more respected than his virtues as an individual were admired. After attaining to very high honours in his profession, he declined those highest ones to which he might reasonably and certainly have aspired, and, in the discharge of his duty, was willing, at his time of life, to undertake that duty, accompanied as it was
367
368
369
Lord A. Hamilton,
in explanation, said, that the learned lord seemed to have understood him as using the fact of the absence of the baron of the exchequer, as an "argumentum ad hominem:" but it was with quite a contrary intention. All that he meant to say was, that, judging from the absence of this gentleman for two or three years (a term which the learned lord had corrected, by substituting one year in its place), it appeared that four barons were sufficient for the business of the court.
The Lord Advocate
remarked, that individuals were always liable to indisposition. He had felt it necessary to make the observations which he had made in justice to the character of a distinguished individual now no more.
Sir John Newport
contended House were justified in distrust of his majesty's ministers this subject. Three cabinet ministers had voted in the first instance against the institution of a commission; but such a distrust, was further reasonable, because his majesty's ministers had done every thing in their power, first to delay, and afterwards to frustrate the objects of that commission. After the address which was voted had been carried to the foot of the throne, seven months elapsed before any thing was done in the business. At last the commission was appointed; but the learned lord had said that commission had traveled out of its jurisdiction in meddling at all with the constitution of the court, as regarded the judges. Now
370
371
l.
l.,
l.
372
373
Lord Castlereagh
wished shortly to state the reasons which induced him to vote against the noble lord's motion. A report having been made by the commissioners appointed by parliament, that report was referred to the consideration of the chief judges of Scotland, who gave it as their decided opinion, for which opinion the grounds were distinctly stated, that the establishment of the court of exchequer ought to be kept in its full state; and now the noble lord called upon the House without previous inquiry, without any evidence, and without suggesting any facts on his own authority, to come to the conclusion that the constitution of the court of exchequer in Scotland ought to be changed—that that constitution for ages had been faulty—and that the decision of certain commissioners ought to be preferred to the deliberate judgment of the learned heads of all the different courts. Before he stated the reasons why he could not join in opinion with the noble lord, he must be allowed to say a few words (and few they should be, as he was not desirous of diverting the attention of members to any by-battle) on the conduct and motives of government. He did not complain of the hon. baronet for watching over the report, and protecting it with a sort of paternal solicitude; nor should he object to the introduction by him of any direct motion of censure upon ministers if he thought they had deserved it; but he begged the hon. baronet to observe, that if he supposed that, in times like the present, ministers had any other object in view than to redress and reform actual abuses,
374
375
dictum
376
dictum
l.
377
l.
378
Mr. Tierney
said, that he never had entertained a doubt that this was one of the motions which ministers would meet by the previous question. What course had the noble lord pursued? He had endeavoured to make people believe that ministers were a set of very ill-used gentlemen, and giving the real point in dispute the go-by, he had maintained, that his noble friend had introduced a new fangled, or to use his lordship's own most happily applied epithet, a fantastical proposition. His lordship had warned the new members to be on their guard, for if they voted with opposition they might get into great difficulties. If they supported the noble lord, they had
379
380
381
382
l.
383
384
385
l.
l.
Mr. W. Dundas
opposed the motion, and defended the conduct of government in the appointment. The commissioners, he observed, had, in four short lines, without any reason assigned, decided against the appointment; but the judges, who had more experience of the business of the court, and who were men of unimpeachable integrity, had approved of it, and given their reasons for that approval.
Lord A. Hamilton
observed, in reference to what a noble lord had said, that he did not intend to confine his motion to the one at present before the House.
386
List of the Minority.
Acland, sir T.
Allen, John H.
Astley, J. D.
Althorp, viscount
387
Anson, hon. G.
Harbord, hon. Ed.
Anson, sir G.
Hervey, D. W.
Aubrey, sir John
Heathcote, G.
Boughey, sir J. F.
Heron, sir R.
Bagwell, rt. hon. W.
Hill, lord A.
Benett, John
Hobhouse, J. C.
Belgrave, viscount
Honywood, W. P.
Butterworth, Jos.
Hornby, E.
Burrell, sir C.
Hughes, W. L.
Bankes, Henry
Hughes, col.
Barham, J. F,
Jervoise, G. P.
Barnard, viscount
Keck, G. A. L.
Barrett, S. M.
Kennedy, T. F.
Beaumont, T. W.
King, sir John D.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Legh, Thos.
Benyon, Benj.
Eawson, mar.
Bernal, Ralph
Lamb, hon. W.
Birch, Joseph
Lambton, J. G.
Brougham, H.
Lemon, sir W.
Burdett, sir F.
Lloyd, sir Ed.
Bury, viscount
Lloyd, J. M.
Byng, George
Lushington, Steph.
Bright, Henry
Maberly, John
Chetwynd, G.
Maberly, W. L.
Calvert, Nic.
Marryat, Jos.
Cherry, G. H.
Macdonald, J.
Calthorpe, hon. F. G.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Calcraft, John
Martin, John
Calcraft, J. jun.
Milbank, Mark
Calvert, C.
Milton, viscount
Campbell, hon. J.
Monck, J. B.
Crewe, R. S.
Moore, Peter
Carter, John
Moore, Abraham
Cavendish, Henry
Mostyn, sir T.
Caulfield, hon. H.
Neville, hon. R.
Clifton, viscount
Newport, rt. hon sir J.
Coke, T. W.
Newman, R. W.
Colburne, N. R.
Nugent, lord
De Crespigny, sir W.
Onslow, Arthur
Davenport, Davies
O'Grady, S.
Dawson, H. M.
Ord, Wm.
Davies, T. H.
Osborne, lord F.
Denison, Wm.
Ossulston, lord
Denman, Thos.
Plummer, John
Dundas, hon. L.
Pollen, sir John
Duncannon, visc.
Peel, Wm. Y.
Dundas, Thos.
Phillimore, Jos.
Evans, Wm.
Portman, E. B.
Ellice, Ed.
Palmer, col.
Fane, John
Palmer, C. F.
Ferrand, Robert
Pares, Thos.
Fellowes, W. H.
Parnell, Wm.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Peirse, Henry
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Pelham, hon. C.
Fitzroy, lord C.
Philips, George
Fitzroy, lord J.
Philips, Geo. jun.
Folkestone, visc.
Ponsonby, hon, F. C.
Frankland, R.
Power, Rich.
Gaskell, B.
Powlett, hon. W.
Grosvenor, Thos.
Price, Rt.
Gordon, Robt.
Pym, Francis
Graham, J. R. G.
Rickford, Wm.
Graham, Sandford
Eamsbottom, John
Grenfell, Pascoe
Ramsden, J. C.
Guise, sir W.
Ricardo, David
Gurney, R. H.
Ridley, sir M. W.
Haldimand, W.
Robarts, A.
388
Robarts, G.
Tremayne, J. H.
Robinson, sir G.
Tulk, C. A.
Rowley, sir W.
Townshend, lord C.
Rumbold, C.
Tavistock, marq.
Russell, lord J.
Taylor, C.
Russell, lord G. W.
Tierney, right hon. G.
Sebright, sir J.
Wynn, sir W.
Spooner, R.
Wynn, C. W.
Staunton, sir G.
Wodehouse, E.
Scott, J.
Whitmore, W.
Smith, Abel
Williams, sir R.
Smith, Robert
Webbe, Ed.
Smith, John
Whitbread, W. H.
Smith, hon. Robt.
Whitbread, S. C.
Smith, Saml.
Wilkins, Walter
Smith, Wm.
Williams, W.
Scarlett, James
Wilson, sir Robt.
Sefton, earl
Winnington, sir T.
Stanley, lord
Wood, alderman
Stewart, Wm.
Wyvill, M.
Stuart, lord J.
TELLERS.
Sykes, Dan.
Hamilton, lord A.
Spurrier, C.
Abercromby, hon. J.
HOUSE OF LORD
Tuesday, May 16, 1820.
COMMERCIAL DISTRESS—PETITION FROM BIRMINGHAM.]
Lord Calthorpe
rose to present a petition from the merchants and manufacturers of Birmingham, and observed, that its object was to induce their lordships to inquire into the distress of which the petitioners complained, and with which they were most grievously afflicted. The petitioners were, highly respectable persons, who would not come forward with frivolous complaints. They did not speak the language of unmanly despondency, but, conscious that the trade and manufactures of the country were in a state of great depression, they were anxious to see them restored to their wonted prosperity and vigour; or, if there existed any obstruction to that restoration, that its cause should be ascertained. Although he did not expect that any such inquiry would remedy the distress of which the petitioners complained, he thought the wish they expressed deserved the serious attention of their lordships. This petition spoke the language of a considerable portion of the manufacturing interest of the country; and it appeared to him that it would be but showing a fair concession to the opinion of such persons, and a just sympathy with the existing distress, if their lordships went into an inquiry, even though they should expect no advantageous result from it, and though they believed the evil to be one which admitted of no parliamentary remedy.
389
The Marquis of Lansdowne,
before he offered any observations on the subject of the petition, wished to ask the noble lord opposite, whether it was his intention to propose to refer it to a committee, or to propose any other mode of inquiry into the distress to which it referred?
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he had no objection to answer the question of the noble marquis. His noble friend had alluded to the supposed intention of instituting an inquiry in another place, and it might be a question whether a simultaneous inquiry on another branch of the evil complained of would be advisable. To such a proceeding, with proper limitations, he could have no objection; and were a motion of that nature made by the noble marquis, or any other of the noble lords on that side of the House, he should not oppose it, but would take the opportunity of stating what his view and that of his majesty's government on the subject was. Thus far he was desirous to go to satisfy the public anxiety. No advantage, he was convinced, could be gained from a general investigation, and he was most desirous that no misconception should take place on the subject. While he stated this much, he must at the same time observe, that he did not intend to make any proposition on the part of the executive government. He did not think that the executive government ought to come down and propose to institute an inquiry on a subject of this kind, unless they were prepared with a cure, or distinctly saw some remedy which it would be in the power of parliament to apply. As he had said, however, he would make no objection to any inquiry which might
390
The Marquis of Lansdowne
concurred in what had been said respecting the petition, which he regarded as fully meriting the character of the noble lord who presented it and the noble earl opposite had given it. In suitable language it stated the situation of the country and of the petitioners; it did not attempt to point out any remedy, but called upon their lordships to consider the subject. To such an appeal he was confident their lordships would listen. He had hoped that the noble earl opposite would have thought proper to recommend the instituting, either in or out of that House, such an inquiry as might lead at least to an explanation of the causes of the present distress; and, if no immediate remedy could be applied, to show the grounds on which it would be necessary that the evil the country was now suffering ought to be longer endured. Being satisfied that no such inquiry could be usefully instituted, without the concurrence of the executive government with the two Houses of Parliament, he was most desirous that the subject should be taken up by his majesty's ministers; but having ascertained that neither the noble earl opposite, nor any of his colleagues, entertained any such intention, and understanding also that the noble lord who presented the petition did not mean himself to call for any farther proceeding, he should certainly consider it his duty to submit to their lordships a motion for instituting an inquiry; but he could not think it advisable to propose such an inquiry upon that extensive and complicated scale which an investigation of the situation of the country in all the branches of its distress would require. He was satisfied that the inquiry
391
The Earl of Liverpool
declared, that to the noble marquis's motion, limited as he meant to propose it, he had no objection. When the proposition for appointing a committee should be made, he would state his view of the subject, but certainly not with any intention of opposing it. What it might then be proper to do would be a subject for future consideration. In the mean time, he should not object to the petition being referred to a committee.
Earl Grosvenor
understood the motion proposed to be brought forward by the noble marquis to be limited to the manufacturing interest, but he hoped that an inquiry into the agricultural distress would not be neglected.
The Earl of Liverpool
observed, that the notice applied only to foreign trade. He approved of the limitation of the inquiry; but as, in the observations be intended to make on the motion, he would take a general view of the state of our trade, it would be impossible for him to do so without entering into a consideration of the situation of the agriculture of the country. At the same time be was fully satisfied that there was no necessity for rendering the inquiry more extensive than the noble marquis proposed to make it. That noble lord had most properly limited his notice to a single object, and it would be for the consideration of the House whether they would afterwards go into any other inquiry.
392
The Marquis of Lansdowne
was aware that his motion would not prevent any noble lord from proposing to extend the powers of the committee, or to institute further investigations; but if any inquiries were to be instituted, he thought it most desirable that they should be limited to distinct points. He was afraid that, if their lordships embarked in a general investigation, a door would be opened for the admission of every theory, and that they would finally be able to come to no conclusion; whereas, by confining the inquiry to one branch of the existing distress, there was a chance of attaining to something like a practical result.
Earl Grosvenor
thought the observations of his noble friend very proper. He was only anxious that it should not appear to the country that their lordships were disposed to devote their attention to the manufacturing or trading distress only.
The Earl of Lauderdale
thought it impossible for their lordships, with so many petitions on their table, to neglect taking notice of the agricultural distress; but what he chiefly rose for was, to implore their lordships not to enter into an investigation of the general state of the country. If they went to such an inquiry, the number of witnesses, and facts of all sorts, which would be brought forward, would only render an accurate conclusion impracticable, and open a door to fresh discussions and disputes. He therefore approved of the manner in which his noble friend had limited his motion; but he also thought with him that the executive government ought at the same time to search with activity for the means of applying a remedy to the distress. One of the greatest uses of parliament was the prosecution of distinct branches of inquiry of the nature of that to which the committee was proposed to be limited; but this did not relieve the executive government from the performance of their duty.
The Earl of Darnley
thought it would be better if no question respecting the distress of the agricultural interest were brought forward, for he did not conceive that any remedy could be applied to the evil. The petitions of the numerous individuals before the House deserved every consideration; but he was afraid a cure for their distress could not be easily found. He thought it his duty to take the earliest opportunity of stating his opinion on the subject.
Lord Erskine
differed in opinion with
393
The Earl of Donoughmore
was sorry that government appeared to have thrown the consideration of the distressed state of the country off their own shoulders, because he was convinced that any proposition on the subject would come with more prospect of success, from minister, than from the side of the House: on which he stood; and he hoped he might be allowed to say, that to do so would be nothing more than their duty. Could they possibly have a more important duty than that of attending to the distress of; the country? With all the details of that distress his majesty's ministers must of necessity be better acquainted than any other individuals in parliament. They must have before them facts, the knowledge of which no other persons could obtain. A proposition brought forward by them would be certain of having effect; while, from the side of the House on which he sat, it was almost sure of a negative.
The Earl of Liverpool
felt it impossible, after what had fallen from the noble earl who spoke last, not to trouble their lordships with a few words. He had not stood in the way of the discussion of the state of the country, for their lordships would recollect him to have stated, that when the proposition of the noble marquis should be brought, he would not confine himself to a silent vote in its support, but should on that day be prepared to enter into, not a limited discussion, but into the consideration of every subject connected with the motion. Here he would have wished that the matter had been allowed to rest; but the noble lord had supposed that, because his majesty's ministers did not come to parliament with a proposition on the part of the executive government, they neglected their duty. He agreed with the noble lord that it was their duty at all times, and
394
Earl Grosvenor
was far from proposing that agricultural distress should make a part of the inquiry about to be brought forward, and he was indeed far from supposing that any good could be done by the inquiry: that is, that any effectual remedy would be found by the committee. It was, however, proper that those who suffered so severely should have their prayer for inquiry satisfied. In his opinion, there was only one remedy for the public distress, and that was the application of the strictest economy to every part of the public expenditure; and he must say that,
395
The petition was laid on the table, and their lordships were orderd to be summoned for Friday se'nnight.
EMPLOYMENT FOR THE POOR.]
Earl Stanhope*
rose and said:—My lords;—In rising to submit to your lordships the motion of which I gave notice some days ago, I am influenced solely by a sense of public duty; and I am deeply impressed with the extreme importance of the subject to which I am anxious to call your attention, that of providing employment for the poor. In circumstances like the present, of extraordinary difficulty and danger, the consideration of this subject is perhaps of all others the most interesting and important, as we know that in almost every part of the country, the want of employment for the poor has produced severe distress; and as we knew also, that the discontent of those who suffer from that distress, has in some parts of the country assumed even the character of disaffection. The first and most urgent duty which your lordships had to discharge, was, to repress the machinations of the disaffected, when they tended to the subversion of that ancient and excellent constitution which has so long been the happiness and honour of this nation, and has so long secured its liberties and welfare. But your lordships have another duty to perform—a duty most important in itself, and of which the performance will be most beneficial to your country, and most honourable to yourselves; I mean the duty of inquiring, whence has arisen that calamitous situation of public affairs, which no man can contemplate without apprehension and alarm;—what have been the causes, and what might be the remedy, of that great and general distress which has produced such great and general discontent.
* From the original edition, printed, for J. Harding, St. James's-street.
396
397
* See First Series, voK.41, p. 230.
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
The Earl of Liverpool
did not intend to enter into any discussion of the various topics which his noble friend had introduced in the course of his able speech, because, if he did, he should be obliged to trespass on the patience of their lordships to an extent which they could hardly be expected to forgive, since a discussion of them would lead to an examination of the whole principles of political economy, and of the origin of agriculture, of manufactures and of commerce, not only in this, but in every other country. He was also the more inclined to defer the discussion of those topics, because another opportunity would shortly present itself, when it could be carried on with greater practical advantage than it could be carried on at the present moment. He should preface the few remarks which he was about to offer to their lordships by thanking his noble friend for the candid manner in which he had brought forward his present motion. His noble friend had pointed out the object which he wished to accomplish in the most clear and manly terms, and had explained most distinctly the views with which he intended to go into the proposed committee; and and yet, with the exception of the benevolent intentions entertained by his noble friend of benefiting the poor in the first place, and the country in the second, there was not a single position in his speech to which he was not prepared to give his most direct and unqualified disapprobation; for the propositions which his noble friend had maintained went to subvert the whole political economy of the country, and to make an entire change in the whole of its commercial relations. He had commenced his speech by laying down a most dangerous distinction between the manufacturing and the agricultural interests; and by stating that the policy of the British government, which,
418
419
420
421
422
Earl Stanhope
made a short reply, in which he complained that his noble friend had misunderstood him both on the subject of waste lands and on that of machinery. He regretted that the money spent in useless expeditions such as that to the North Pole, was not laid out in the erection of cottages; remonstrated against the rejection of his general motion, on the ground upon which his noble friend had objected to his specific plan; and declared that as his opinions on the subject were unchanged he should feel it his duty to enter them on the Journals.
The previous question was then carried without a division.
PROTEST AGAINST THE REJECTION OF EARL STANHOPE'S MOTION.]
The following Protest was entered on the Journals;
"Dissentient,
"1st, Because it is, in my opinion, the duty of parliament to consider the practicability, arid the means of alleviating the distress which at present exists in consequence of the want of employment for the poor, particularly as that distress has in
423
2nd, Because I cannot contemplate without deep regret, and serious apprehension, the continuance of those calamities which are at present caused by the want of employment for the poor, which tend to disturb the public peace, as well as to destroy the public prosperity, and which, from every consideration of humanity and policy, are much to be deplored.
3rd, "Because it appears tome, that a very considerable number of the poor might be provided with employment: 1st, By encouraging the public fisheries, which might prove an abundant source of occupation and subsistence. 2ndly, By promoting the cultivation of waste land, of which many millions of acres still exist in this island. And 3rdly, By adopting proper regulations respecting the use of the machinery, which, by abridging labour, has deprived many industrious persons of employment, both in agriculture and in manufactures.
4th, "Because the adoption of such measures would, in my opinion, diminish very considerably the amount of the poor's rates, and thereby tend to relieve the severe distress which is now suffered by the agricultural interests of the country, and to revive in the labouring classes, those habits and feelings of independence which are inseparably connected with their welfare.
5th, "Because the relief which might be afforded to the poor by such measures would not be precarious, transient, of an eleemosynary nature, and would not be attended with such an expense as would be onerous to the state.
6th, "Because the inquiry which was recommended, seems particularly expedient, under the present circumstances of the country, which is afflicted with a grievous burthen of debt and taxes, and which suffers also from a stagnation of trade, arising in great measure from causes which may prove to be not of a temporary nature, and which it may not be in the power of this country to control.
7th, "Because if the measures which were suggested for the employment of the poor were considered to be impracticable, or inexpedient, the appointment of the committee which was proposed, would, in
424
8th, "Because the appointment of that committee would have been highly gratifying to the people, and would also have afforded an additional proof, that this House is anxious to investigate the causes of any public distress, and as far as is practicable, to administer relief.
9th, "Because that committee would, by its inquiries, have furnished more ample and satisfactory information, than this House has yet obtained, on a subject most interesting in itself, and peculiarly important at the present moment, the state and condition of the labouring classes.
10th, "Because it has not been shown by any argument which has been adduced, that it would in any respect be inexpedient to institute the inquiry which was recommended, and which seems to be imperiously demanded by the wants and wishes of the poor. (Signed) STANHOPE."
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, May 16, 1820.
COMMERCIAL RESTRICTIONS—PETITION FROM THE GLASGOW CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.]
Mr. Finlay
said, he held in his hand a petition from the Chamber of Commerce of Glasgow, a body of gentlemen who were highly interested in the commercial prosperity of the country, praying the establishment of a free trade, and the removal of all restrictions upon commercial imports and exports. Upon a subject of such vital importance, he trusted the House would grant him its indulgence for a few moments. The presentation of a similar petition from the merchants of the city of London made it the more necessary that he should say a few words on the present occasion. The petitioners were of opinion, that the distresses of the commercial and manufacturing interests of this country were much increased, if not in a great measure caused by the various restrictions which impeded our imports from and exports to foreign countries. These restrictions having been so long continued in this country, led other nations into a belief that it was to such regulations we owed our prosperity, and thus induced them to, follow our example. The petitioners were of opinion, not only that such restrictions ought to be removed,
425
426
427
428
429
The petition was brought up and read. On the question that it do he on the table,
Mr. Baring
said, that a petition coming from so great and respectable a body as the Chamber of Commerce of Glasgow, deserved the most favourable attention from that House. Every efficient means ought to be taken to promote their reasonable objects; every consideration was due to their reasonable claims. When he had a few days ago presented a similar petition to that House, from the merchants and traders of London, he moved that it should he on the table, in order to see, in the mean time, what the other great commercial towns would be disposed to do. He did so, because he felt convinced that whatever might be the disposition of parliament, no great practical benefit could be accomplished without the general concurrence of the country at large. His hon. friend who had just presented the petition before them, differed from him, but in very few and inefficient points. The House, he said, must have heard with pleasure from his hon. friend, that some of the principal manufactures which had been for some time depressed, had, at least partially, revived. And he agreed with his hon. friend in thinking, that, however gloomy and unpromising appearances might be, there was yet no serious apprehension (if proper exertions were made) that the, commercial and manufacturing interests of this country would be endangered in any material degree. During the war an extraordinary impulse was given to the manufacturing interests of England—an extensive, but an artificial trade prevailed, which could not be kept up in a time of peace. That state of things must give way to one of a more moderate, but more solid and more natural kind. He concurred with his hon. friend, that if the House would encourage the commerce and manufactures of the country by good laws—by wise and liberal regulations, that they would again behold the revival of commerce and of general prosperity. But it was only by great efforts that such desirable objects could be accomplished; they were not to fall asleep over the state of the country; they were not to suppose,
430
431
Ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. Ellice
presented a petition from certain Woollen Manufacturers of Hawick. He said, that after the discussion which had taken place on the petition presented by the member for Glasgow, and after the observations which had fallen from his hon. friend (Mr. Baring), he was induced to say one or two words on presenting the petition which he held in his hand. As an instance of the advantage which the public derived from the discussions which had taken place in that House, he had now the honour of presenting, for the first time, a petition from a numerous and respectable body of manufacturers, praying to be relieved from the general restrictions which were placed on the trade of the country; they complained of the great distress and difficulties under which they laboured; and were of opinion that the state of things was such as could not long
432
Ordered to lie on the table.
MILITARY EXPENDITURE OF THE COUNTRY.]
Colonel Davies
rose to direct the attention of the House to a subject at all times of the utmost importance, but. more peculiarly so at the present moment, when the country, labouring under the pressure of severe and accumulated distress, required every assistance which it was in the power of parliament to afford it. He felt that he must throw himself on the indulgence of the House, of which he certainly had need when he undertook the task of bringing under its consideration our existing military establishments, with a view to point out what might require amendment, and to suggest a remedy. He also felt, that in bringing forward this subject at the present time, he should have to encounter disadvantages and difficulties which, when he first turned his thoughts to it, he did not anticipate; for, however general the desire throughout the country might be to see some measure adopted, which should have for its object a retrenchment in the public expenditure, yet the unfortunate events which had lately occurred, had filled the minds of many with so much alarm, that however friendly they might be to the general principle of economy, he should find them at the outset, prejudiced against any proposition which could, by possibility, weaken the powers at the disposal of government. Yet, as his object was inquiry, and he should not presume to ask the House to adopt any definitive measures at his suggestion, he hoped, that all those who were friendly to economy, however much they might differ from him as to the extent of the danger by which we were threatened, would join in assisting to promote an inquiry, which could not possibly be attended with mischief, and might be productive of essential benefit to the country. Every thinking man who looked to the situation of this once flourishing country, and saw the misery which had overtaken every class of the
433
434
435
l.;
l.;
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
436
437
438
l.
l.
l.
l.
439
l.
l.
l.
440
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
441
l.
l.
l.
l.
442
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.;
l.;
l.
l.
l.
443
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
444
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
445
Mr. Long
expressed his surprise, that the gallant officer should say, the paymaster general was no public accountant.
Colonel Davies
denied that he had made any such statement.
446
Mr. Long
observed, that if the gallant officer would take the trouble of inquiring, he would find that the paymaster general was one of the greatest public accountants in the country.
Colonel Davies
again denied the statement imputed to him by the right hon. gentleman.
Mr. Long
regretted his misconception of the gallant officer's words, assuring him that he had no disposition whatever to misinterpret any hon. member. But he was quite certain, that if the gallant officer would take the trouble of seeking accurate information, or would call at the office, and judge for himself, he would be convinced of his mistake in supposing that the business of the paymaster general's department could be consistently transferred to the war-office. The business of the paymaster-general's department was, indeed, of a very onerous description. The duties which were performed there were extremely various; the issue of the half-pay alone required considerable time and attention, especially in consequence of the arrangement for making that payment quarterly instead of half-yearly, as was the former custom. But the settlement of the different accounts in that department was attended with a great deal of trouble. Upon his (Mr. L.'s) introduction to this office, he found there was an arrear of unsettled accounts for no less than 25 years, nay since Mr. Burke's arrangement was adopted; and he had the satisfaction to say that all those accounts were now adjusted, and passed to the commission for auditing public accounts. This discharge of business accounted for the difference between the expence of the paymaster-general's department at the present day, compared with the period referred to by the gallant officer. But he would venture to say, that if the gallant officer would inquire and compare the present expense of this department with that incurred during the war, he would find that a greater reduction had taken place in that office since the conclusion of the peace, than in any other office concerned in the superintendence of the public expenditure. With regard to the superannuated allowances adverted to by the gallant officer, in no instance did any of those allowances exceed the amount settled by statute, while some of them fell short of that amount, as he (Mr. Long) showed by quoting the cases. When he became paymaster general, he found
447
Colonel Davies
thought there was cause to complain that the public accountants connected with the right hon. gentleman's department were not sufficiently under the control of that department.
Mr. Long
observed, that the power of the office alluded to was amply sufficient for any effective purpose of control upon the conduct of every individual connected with the department.
Lord Palmerston
observed, that he should not, upon the present occasion, anticipate the discussion of the army estimates which were so soon to be brought under the consideration of the House, but he thought it proper to make some remarks upon the statements or calculations of the gallant officer, in which, however, he should be as brief as possible. The gallant officer's animadversions upon the conduct of the several finance committees he should leave to other and more competent persons to answer; merely saying, that in his opinion those committees had performed their important duties with great zeal and ability. But with respect to the gallant officer's calculations upon our military expenditure, he must say, that he could not place much reliance upon their accuracy, from a recollection of the extreme erroneousness of the hon. officer's calculations on the same subject upon a former occasion. Upon the increase of our military establishment since the last year, which naturally gave vise to an increase of expenditure, he did not think it necessary to make any reply to the gallant officer, as the House and the country were fully aware of the reasons connected with our internal situation
448
l.
449
450
451
l.
452
l.
l.;
l.
453
l.
454
455
456
Mr. Calcraft
said, that his hon. friend's motion had been much misrepresented by the noble lord, and that the utmost, extent of his proposition went only to show, that if the weight of expenditure which bore down the people did not admit of complete alleviation, it might at least be rendered more tolerable. But if any one had only heard the latter part of the noble lord's speech, he would be inclined to think his hon. and gallant, friend was demanding some sacrifice, attended with shame, if not with more ruinous consequences. Now, nothing was more contrary to his intention he only Called for a committee of inquiry, and that after entering into such a detail as must impress every, man with the necessity for its appointment. In one particular, he could not agree with his hon. friend; he alluded to that part of his speech, in which he proposed to lessen the number of the cavalry establishment. He thought it advisable to preserve the skeleton of this establishment by keeping up a number of dismounted cavalry, to provide for any future occasion, in which it might be necessary to recur to it. Generally, however, be, thought the House and the country were deeply indebted to his gallant friend for the laborious and useful duty he had undertaken and so very ably discharged. And if after showing even a probability pf saving several hundred thousand pounds a year to the country
457
Sir Henry Parnell
said, as the expenditure of the army amounted to nearly seven millions annually it became the House to consider whether or not some saving might not be effected, or, at all events, whether a committee should not be appointed to ascertain if it could be effected. An hon. friend of his had said, the noble lord was well paid for making an annual speech, but his hon. friend laid overrated the noble lord's deserts, for last year he made no speech; and on the army estimates being brought-down, referred the House merely to the dry details. The civil offices in the army department were, now in the fifth year of peace, greater than after the first four years of the last war. In the year 1792 one department cost 813
l.;
l.
458
l.
l.;
l.;
l;
Colonel Davies,
in reply said that the statements he had made, and the arguments which he bad drawn from them, had been only met by the assertions of the hoble lord, which, however convincing or satisfactory to the House of Commons, could not be so to the country in general; With respect to the commission of military inquiry to which reference had been made by the noble lord, it had existed only during war. After entering into a recapitulation of the various topics he had urged in his opening speech he concluded by expressing his conviction that if the House would not be thought wholly inattentive to the interests of the country, they would promote an inquiry, which was calculated to effect so large a saving in the public expenditure.
Colonel Grant
begged to offer some observations to the House as a military man. He objected to any decrease of the cavalry establishment, and contended that nothing was more useful than to keep up a large skeleton of officers and non-commissioned officers, who might be ready for active service upon future emergencies. In alluding to the forge-carts, which had been objected to on the ground of unnecessary expenditure, be observed, that they were on many occasions of the greatest service, and that much distress had been experienced from the want of them in the retreat of sir John Moore from Corunna. Adverting to the Tiding school, and to the number of staff employed he contended that they were both indispensable.
Mr. Ellice
said, he merely rose to state the grounds on which he meant to support the hon. member's motion for inquiry. To the various details of the question, whether regarding cavalry or infantry, he professed himself incompetent; but it was his wish to look a little beyond those details; and he thought that some inquiry ought to be made as to the necessity of keeping up the unheard-of military force now established in this country in a time of peace. He thought, too, that some
459
Colonel Davies
rose to explain. It had never been his intention, in his allusion to the forge carts, to maintain that they were not necessary on foreign service. The gallant colonel had completely misunderstood him in supposing he considered this expense as unnecessary one on actual service.
The House divided: Ayes, 45; Noes, 125: Majority against the Motion, 80.
List of the Minority
Allan, J. H.
Newport, sir J.
Atthorp, lord
Ord, W.
Bary, lord
O'Callaghan, J.
Barrett, S.
Palmer, F.
Barham, J.F. jun.
Powers R.
Bright, H.
Parnell, sir H.
Calvert, C.
Parnell, W.
Carter, T.
Pryce, R.
Cromptbn, Sam.
Ramsden, J. C.
De Crespigny, sir W.
Robinson, sir G.
Dundas.T.
Smithy A.
Dundas, H. L.
Smith, Wm
Grenfell, Pascoe
Smith, Samuel
Qurney, R. H.
Sefton, lord
Haldimand W.
Sykes, D.
Heron, sir R.
Spurrier, C. H.
Harbord, hon. E.
Wood, alderman
Kennedy T.
Webb. E.
Lushington, Dr.
Whitbread, W. H.
Millbank, Mark
Whitbread W. H.
Maxwell, W.
TELLERS.
Milton, lord
Daivies, col.
Monck, J. B.
Ellice, Edw.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, May 17, 1820.
NAVY ESTIMATES.]
The House having resolved itself into a committee of Supply to which the Navy Estimates were referred,
460
Sir George Warrender
proceeded to observe, that it was not intended to make any material difference between the vote of the last and the estimates of it was not intended to make any material difference between the vote of the last and the estimates of the present year. He believed the propriety of the addition which had been made to the marines was not likely to be called in question. On this occasion, he should only move for a vote, of the sum of 500,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.
s.
l.
l.
s.
l.
s.
l.
The Resolutions were agreed to.
TRANSACTIONS AT MANCHESTER.]
Mr. Hobhouse,
in the absence of his hon. colleague (sit F. Burdett), wished to correct an error in the entry-book, as to a notice given: by the hon. baronet. It was supposed that he had given notice of a motion relative to the inquest at Oldham, but the intended motion would refer to the transactions at Manchester on the 16th of August last, and would be brought forward on the earliest open day after the holidays.
The Speaker,
on examining the entry-book, said, the notices appeared to be as its was now described.
Mr. Hobhouse
apologized for the mistake, and fixed the motion for the 8th of June.
461
CIVIL LIST BILL.]
Lord Castlereagh
moved the order of the day for the House to resolve itself into a committee on this bill. On the motion that the Speaker do leave the chair,
Mr. Bennet
said, he wished, before the question was decided, to make a few observations; and, in the first place, he would state with regard to the notice he had given to move a clause in the committee for the exclusion of persons, from that House who received pensions, from the civil list, that he had abandoned that idea, and would proceed in a different way. He could not help expressing his surprise that ministers had thought proper to introduce the civil list to the House in the manner they had done; because he felt that it was neither advantageous to the Crown, nor befitting the present situation of the country. Let the House always bear it in view, that the civil list now, called for was founded on the report of a committee appointed by the ministers, of the Crown—they having, in the first; place, expressly refused the motion of his right hon. friend (Mr. Tierney), that persons, papers, and records, should be examined. The only persons, therefore, who were examined, were the ministers themselves; and now, without having any new information of any sort or kind laid before parliament, they thought fit to come down to the House and call for a civil list, exactly of the same amount, precisely in the same manner, and with the very identical machinery, as had been witnessed in 1816. He perfectly recollected the arguments used by the noble lord in 1816, and by the late Mr. Perceval in 1812. At those periods, when the different discussions on the civil list took place, ministers exclaimed, "Don't interfere with the question now; the time will come, and probably very soon, when the whole subject will be brought under the consideration of parliament." That time had come; and the way ministers now used the House was, to negative every motion for inquiry to deny every paper called for, and to refer them, forsooth, to the documents of 1816. He for one, considered the civil list as a great deal too large under any circumstances; but, under the existing circumstances of the country, it appeared to him to be so large that it must excite out of doors very unpleasant feelings. The House: would recollect that the civil list was constructed on the estimate of three of the most expensive years that had ever occurred, and
462
l.,
463
l.;
l.;
l.
l.
l.,
464
l.
l.,
l.
*
The House then went into the committee. The blank left for the amount of the English civil list was filled up with the sum of 850,000
l.
*
465
l.,
Sir J. Newport
expressed a hope that some documents would be laid before the House with respect to the manner in which the civil list for Ireland was disposed of. He had called for certain
data
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
466
l.
Lord Castlereagh
said, that, as far as; his knowledge extended, the emoluments of the office of lord-lieutenant were completely unequal to defray its necessary; expenses. One noble duke, lately deceased, who had held the situation, had crippled his fortune considerably, although the salary had been improved. Parliament, feeling that the salary was inadequate to support the dignity of the situation, had thought proper to raise it to; 30,000
l.
l.
l.
Sir J. Newport
said, there was not any thing like the same degree of splendor now kept up by the lord-lieutenant of Ireland as there had been at former periods when the salary was not so large. He would state further, that since the periods when the increase was granted, a great alteration had taken place in the state of the currency; so that 20,000
l.
l.
467
l.
l.
Mr. C. Grant,
not having been in the House at the period alluded to by the right hon. baronet, could not express any opinion on the facts stated by him, but, from his connexion with Ireland, he felt himself called on to state, that the salary now allowed to the lord-lieutenant was not too great when they considered the dignity of the situation. It was, he believed, a well-known fact that the late duke of Richmond suffered severely in his private fortune in consequence of the smallness of his allowance. He could also state, that the late lord-lieutenant had said that the salary, though then increased to 30,000
l.
468
Mr. Tierney
complained that they were called on to vote a sum of 850,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
469
l.
470
Sir Henry Parnell
contended, that the office of lord lieutenant of Ireland was al together as useless as it was expensive. He was of opinion that having separate governments for England and for Ireland, led to inconvenience and embarrassment. At present it was well known that a serious division existed between the members of the government of that country. To the present lord lieutenant and the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Grant) every thanks and gratitude were due. That right hon. gentleman had displayed both policy and liberality, integrity in his views, and conciliation in his manner; but he regretted to say that other members of the Irish government were not distinguished for similar virtues. He believed that the office1 of lord lieutenant, instead of an expence of 30,000
l,
l.
Lord Castlereagh
said, that as to the observation made, that the House had taw information; before them respecting the Irish civil list for coming to a decision, he apprehended they had. There had never been occasion to bring the civil list of Ireland before parliament with a view of calling for any supply to make up its deficiency. It had never been in debt; while the civil list of England had been several times under consideration, either with the view. Of supplying its deficiency, or with, the view of transferring some of its charges to other funds. Yet the civil list of Iceland had been brought under review. The sum of 225,000
l.
471
l.
l.
472
Mr. Shaw
expressed his regret and astonishment to hear any Irish member; suggesting in that House, the policy of abolishing the office of lord lieutenant of Ireland. Dublin had suffered most severely by the Act of Union, and no saving that might follow the abolition of the office could be compared to the destruction which that measure would bring upon the citizens of Dublin. Every one at all acquainted with the state of Ireland, knew how much, and how severely she suffered by absentees, but if the office of lord lieutenant, the last remaining inducement for men of property to remain at home, was abolished, it would have the effect of banishing them altogether from Ireland.
Sir John Newport
said, he had never entertained the idea of the abolition of the lord-lieutenancy, and begged not to be implicated in that charge.
Mr. Wellesley Pole
said, that his late right hon. friend Mr. Perceval had brought forward the motion for augmenting the salary of the lord lieutenant, after he had ascertained that no lord lieutenant could hold the office without expending double the sum allowed. The noble duke who then held the office was not aware of the investigation, and to any inquiry of the kind he would have turned a deaf ear. It was all done without his knowledge. It was thought unjust that the lord lieu-
473
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Tierney
said, he had never lent himself to any such proposition as that of the abolition of the office of lord lieu-
474
Sir H. Parnell
wished to be understood that he had not imputed the least blame to earl Talbot. As to the propriety of retaining the office of lord lieutenant, there was a difference in his opinion and that of his right hon. friend, of the view taken of that question in Ireland; and the difference was easily accounted for. His right hon. friend (Mr. W. Pole) had spent most of his time in the Castle at Dublin, where there was not a whisper, no doubt, against such an office. He (sir H. P.) on the other hand, spent most of his time in the country in Ireland, where he often heard the opinion that a change might advantageously take place in the executive government of Ireland. It was not his wish to abolish the office of lord lieutenant without finding a substitute; but he thought the business of the police of Ireland would be mach better managed by appointing lords lieutenants of counties, after the English system. Much difficulty was at present felt from the want of authorities in the different counties, to communicate with the government, as the governors of counties did not answer this purpose. Formerly there was a strong opinion in favour of the office of lord lieutenant, but at present the general opinion respecting it was much changed.
Mr. Baring
allowed, that it was not proper for an English member to interfere to propose the abolition of such an office as that of lord lieutenant of Ireland, and he thought, that whatever little pomp remained in the capital of Ireland, should not be abolished. But, he observed, in general, that propositions for the increase of the salaries of offices passed very easily in the House, and that during all the time he had sat there, he had never known any reduction of those salaries to be made. When 10,000
l.
l.
475
l.
The clause was agreed to, and the House resumed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, May 18, 1820.
CIVIL LIST BILL.]
On the order of the day for receiving the report of this bill,
Mr. Curwen
said, he could not but deeply lament, that, in the present state of the country, ministers had not recommended and acted upon that system of economy, the necessity for which was so universally admitted. Instead of the measure now before them, he had hoped that ministers, on the part of the Crown, would have stated that a considerable diminution of the civil list expenditure was intended; because, however desirable it was to support the dignity of the Crown, still, at a period like the present, the sufferings and privations of the people ought to be attended to and removed as much as possible. With this feeling, he conceived the greatest ornament of the Crown at this moment would be economy and retrenchment. Everyman who felt the real state of the country must be convinced that its prosperity could alone be hoped for by considerably diminishing the public expenditure. He regretted that a proposition of that kind had not been made on the part of ministers, particularly with reference to the civil list. He conceived that a well-con-
476
Mr. Monck
observed, that the allowances granted to our ambassadors and envoys were extravagant and enormous. He did not wish the country to be niggardly towards those individuals, but he conceived that it would not be derogatory to the dignity of this government if they were put on the same footing as one of the greatest monarchs of Europe—he meant the king of France—placed the ambassadors of that nation. He was credibly Informed that there were but two classes of French ambassadors, the higher and the interior. The members of the first class were paid 6,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
Lord Castlereagh
said, that in 1815 a committee of the House of Commons investigated this branch of expenditure and recommended that the present allowances should be granted. That recommendation was acceded to without opposition; and the provision then suggested, and which was made on a general view of the subject, had been continued ever since. Prior to that period particular sums were granted for particular branches of expense to which our ambassadors were liable, but it was thought better to give a specific salary. He could assure the hon. member that the subject had undergone a great deal of consideration, with a view to the greatest possible economy, and at the same time to avoid impoverishing or embarrassing individuals employed as ambassadors. There were,
477
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, the observations that had fallen from the hon. member afforded a further proof, of the necessity of that discussion and inquiry relative to the items of the civil list which had been so repeatedly called for by gentle-men on his side of the House, and as repeatedly refused by the gentlemen opposite. A committee had, it appeared, sat in 1815, and it was said that their decision proceeded on such grounds, that there could be no mistake in the correctness of their calculations. It was, however, properly replied, that the government had stripped that committee of all those powers which could alone enable them to perform their duties effectually. The hon. member for Taunton had truly stated, that ministers had prevented a. close, vigorous, and efficient investigation of every part of the civil list expenditure, and had refused to the committee those facilities by the use of which alone they could hope to arrive at a just conclusion. But, supposing, in 1815, a committee, clothed with such power as would have enabled them to have properly examined the subject, had been appointed, still a fresh inquiry was, he contended, necessary, because the two periods were wholly dissimilar, and the state of the country now was far more critical.
Mr. Philips
said, that the noble lord, in speaking of the salaries granted to our ambassadors, seemed to have forgotten the depreciated state of the currency when the last arrangement was made. The sum of 12,000
l.
l.
478
Lord Castlereagh
said, that when the arrangement was made, it was specifically agreed that our ambassadors should have a fixed salary, independent of any alteration in the currency. That salary was to cover all extraordinaries, and was not liable to be increased on account of any unfavourable fluctuation in the foreign exchanges. As to the hon. member's information relative to the payment of foreign ambassadors, he knew not the source from which he had derived it, and of course could not answer for its correctness.
Mr. Monck
said, he had derived his information from a French gentleman who was in the diplomatic line.
Sir R. Wilson
said, that having had an opportunity of seeing our ambassadors in other countries, he thought it but an act of candour to say, that there were claims made on the hospitality of the English ambassadors which were not made on the ambassadors of any other court.
The report was then agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, May 19, 1820.
COMMERCIAL RESTRICTIONS—PETITION FROM MANCHESTER.]
Mr. Blackburne
presented a Petition from the merchants, manufacturers, and other inhabitants of Manchester, praying a removal of those restrictions by which our commercial intercourse with other nations was impeded.
Mr. Philips
expressed his satisfaction at finding that petitions of this kind were presented from such extensive manufacturing, districts as those of Manchester and its vicinity. It was a convincing proof of the progress of information on the true principle of commercial policy. It was to be lamented that, while such respectable bodies were proceeding thus, another body of persons, the agriculturists, should continue to, call for separate protection and relief. He regretted to find that the exploded doctrine of partial protection should still be adhered to by any one set of persons in the country. It was impossible that any such protection, extended exclusively to one branch of society, should not injure not only itself, but the other branches also. He was of opinion
479
Lord Stanley
bore testimony to the respectability of the petitioners. He hoped that their liberal and enlightened views on the subject of our commercial policy would be acted upon. Whenever any
480
Ordered to lie on the table.
CRIMINAL LAW.]
Sir J. Mackintosh
obtained leave to bring in a bill to repeal so much of the 39th Elizabeth, the 21st; James 1st, the 4th and 9th George 1st, and the 5th, 6th, 8th, 26th, and 27th of George 2nd, as enacted capital punishments on crimes specified therein. Also a bill to repeal so much of the 1st and 2nd of Philip and Mary, the 18th Charles 2nd, the 9th George 1st, and the 12th George 2nd, chap. 29, as enacted capital punishments on the commission of certain offences specified therein.—The hon. and learned member then said, that he had on a former occasion given notice of a bill to consolidate the laws on forgery; he would now, with the leave of the House, withdraw that notice, and move for leave to bring in a bill "for mitigating the severity of punishment in certain cases of forgery and the crimes connected therewith; and also for more effectually detecting the forgery of notes or bills of the Bank of England."—The notice was withdrawn, and leave given to bring in the bill. The hon. and learned member then brought in the bill, which, with the two already mentioned, were read a first time.
GRAMPOUND DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.]
Lord J. Russell
moved, that the order of the day for the second reading of the Grampound Disfranchisement bill be now read; which having been done, his lordship moved, "that the resolutions of that House, of the 5th of July last, be read." The clerk read the resolutions, as follow:—
nem. con.
481
Ordered to be brought in by lord J. Russell and Mr. Tierney."
Lord J. Russell
then said, that lie felt it necessary, in this stage of the bill which he had been instructed to bring forward, to state briefly the result of the examination which had induced the House to come to the resolutions that had just been read. Those who were in the late parliament would recollect, that a petition had been presented against the return of the members for the borough of Grampound, and that the committee to whom the petition was referred had made a report imputing gross corruption to many of the electors in that borough, and the result was, that the law officers of the Crown were ordered to institute prosecutions against those electors. Subsequently, copies of the indictments on which 23 of the voters of Grampound had been found guilty were laid before the House, together with other documents connected with the election. On these grounds he moved that the House should go into a committee on the abuse of the elective franchise in Grampound. That proposition was immediately assented to by the noble lord opposite, and the committee was appointed. On proceeding with the inquiry, it was clearly proved, by the evidence of Mr. Teed, that instructions had been given by sir Manasseh Lopez to distribute sums of money to the electors of Grampound, so as to secure a majority of them. It was also proved, by an individual who belonged to Grampound, that he had seen sir M. Lopez on this subject; and that he had informed him of his having collected together a number of voters who were ready to receive his money, and in return to give him their votes. That number, it appeared, was objected to by the agent of sir Manasseh, because it did not comprise a majority of the electors. The witness stated, that a number, constituting a majority, was afterwards collected, and that each of the parties received thirty-five pounds as the price of his vote, a sum with which several of them expressed themselves dissatisfied. It further appeared, that in consequence of this dissatisfaction they gave their votes in favour of other persons. It seemed, that one of the electors had got a list, containing the names of 62 persons who had the right to vote, and of whom 58 had voted; of these 58 no less than 47 had the sum of 35
l.
482
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
483
l.
l.
484
485
*
*
486
487
488
l.
489
Lord Castlereagh
said, that although he had no intention to oppose the second reading; he felt it due to the noble lord, and to the House, to offer some observations on the subject. Whatever steps might afterwards be taken, he thought this the convenient moment for making a few observations on the principles involved in the bill. He should endeavour to imitate the noble lord, who had in the most candid and fair manner stated his views of the question, and the object he proposed to himself in this bill; and if he could not agree entirely with the noble lord, it would be from a different view taken by him of the local circumstances of the borough of Grampound. As far as the principle of the measure was concerned, so far as it was opened by the noble lord, there was no difference of opinion between them. That was, he agreed with the noble lord, that where it was proved satisfactorily that persons having an elective franchise had abused that trust, measures should be taken to protect the security of election and purity of election against the repetition of such abuse. Any difference of opinion arose not from any alterations proposed to be made in the elective franchise in Grampound, because, after the election committee had made their report, he had concurred in promoting further inquiry, and after that inquiry he had concurred in a resolution which stood on their records without a dissentient voice—that further measures were called for by the corruption detected in the borough of Grampound. Up to this point he and the noble lord understood
490
pro tanto;
491
492
493
494
l.,
495
Mr. Tierney
said, he heard with some surprise and great sorrow, the speech of the noble lord. When the resolutions were brought forward by his noble friend, containing a declaration of the principle on which the House would act in case of boroughs convicted of corrupt practices, viz. by transferring the right of election to populous towns, the noble lord had undoubtedly objected to the declaration of such a general principle; but he (Mr. T.) had understood the noble lord to say, that if his noble friend would confine himself to the particular case of Grampound, he should not be adverse to that mode of proceeding: and he was confirmed in his opinion, that such was the impression produced by the words of the noble lord, by a recollection of the eagerness with which he (Mr. T.) had urged his noble friend to close with the proposition of the noble lord, and to accept of a certain advantage rather than endeavour in vain to get more.
Lord Castlereagh
said, he felt it to be due to the right hon. gentleman to prevent his reasoning on a misapprehension, by reminding him that he had distinctly reserved his opinion, on the ground that he was not acquainted with the local circumstances of Grampound.
Mr. Tierney
continued.—He certainly had understood the noble lord at first to agree to his noble friend's proposition. In two or three days, however, the noble lord came down, and in a more guarded manner reserved to himself the right of subsequently expressing it as his opinion that the proposed reform should be of a more gradual kind—that the elective franchise should be given to some of the hundreds in the vicinity of Grampound. The ground of this was, that the innocent might not be punished with the guilty. What he had wished, and he believed this was the wish and the hope of many others and a very large portion too, in the country, was, that a measure, which, at the moment it was known seemed to give general satisfaction, should be carried into effect. It would be useless to deny, that at the moment this proposition was introduced, and was supposed to have received
496
497
498
499
500
501
Mr. Wynn
observed, that after the gross corruption which had been-proved to exist in Grampound, he was glad there was no difference of opinion in the-House as to the necessity of some remedy, and he hoped that the present parliament
502
503
s.
s.
Mr. Sumner
fully concurred in the arguments of the noble lord, and of those gentlemen who supported the bill. He thought that such a measure was absolutely necessary at present. In reply to the clamour which was so much heard out of doors, it had often been said, "Show us the particular evil or imperfection of which you complain, and; see whether we will not apply a remedy." Now Grampound was this case: here was art evil admitted on all hands to exist; and he conceived that they would be given but too just a ground for some of the charges which were made (he thought unjustly) against them, if they did not deal with the present case as it deserved.
504
Mr. Beaumont,
in explanation of his proposition, stated, that the wish just expressed by the hon. member for Surrey was that which he contemplated, namely, that in order to give Yorkshire its due share in the representation, there should be two members for the West Riding, instead of those now returned for Gram-pound; and that upon the next proved case of delinquency in any other borough there should be two members also for the North and East Ridings. Hence a due share of influence on the representation would be given to the manufacturing and agricultural interests, for he had no desire to grant any undue ascendancy to either, and it was obvious that the two members for the West riding would be returned by the manufacturing interest, while it was equally obvious that the members for the other Ridings would be returned by the agricultural or landed interest.
Mr. Canning
said, that if the intended and avowed purpose of the bill had been merely to disfranchise the borough of Grampound, and if it had been left to be filled up in the committee by what mode the vacancy thus occasioned in the representation was to be supplied, he should not have expressed any opinion in the
505
few
506
l.
507
508
l.
l.
l.
l.
509
Mr. Grenfell,
although decidedly averse to the wild theory of which so much had been lately said, and which was termed "parliamentary reform," had no hesitation in declaring his unqualified approbation of the bill, as far as it went to disfranchise the borough of Grampound; and that opinion he had stated the first moment the subject came before the House The leaning of his mind was in favour of transferring the elective right either to the
510
Mr. Davies Gilbert
bore testimony, from local and personal knowledge, to the respectability of the freeholders of the two hundreds to which it was proposed to extend the right of voting for the future representatives of Grampound, declaring that he had no doubt, upon such an arrangement, the members would the returned for, that district upon such an arrangement the members would be returned for that district upon as independent principles as for any county in England. He was decided advocate for the principle of representation upon property for than population; and he though that the signal merit of the representation no in that House was, that it did not amount to a, direct delegation from the people; for it would be impossible for an assembly controlled by the mass of the people to be co-existent with any other, branch of the constitution The events of the few last years had sufficiently proved
511
Sir John Newport
was of opinion that the concluding observations of the hon. member who last spoke, were not called for by the subject under discussion. He thought that the House was bound to examine in what part of the country the greatest portion of the people ought to be represented; and he objected to throwing the borough of Grampound into the adjoining hundreds, upon the ground that the county of Cornwall was already more than sufficiently represented. It mattered little whether the members returned were chosen by the inhabitants of Grampound or by those of the adjacent hundreds; they were still members for the county of Cornwall, and would, in the execution of their parliamentary duties, look especially to the interests of that county. In the present case, an occasion offered for letting in a part of that large portion of the people who were insufficiently represented; and he thought that the House was bound to avail itself of the opportunity. In what quarter of the kingdom did the want of adequate representation more decidedly exist than in Yorkshire? The noble lord opposite had said that he did not consider amount of numbers and contribution in the way of taxation as affording a ground for superior representation. He was surprised at hearing such a proposition from the noble lord, when the noble lord himself in the case of the Union between Ireland and this country, had acted directly upon a contrary principle. Upon that occasion it had been matter of arrangement, in selecting those places which should be struck off and those which should be represented, that the numbers
512
Lord Castlereagh,
in explanation, said, that he was under the necessity of pursuing the course in Ireland alluded to by the hon. baronet, in order to settle the competition between the different boroughs.
Mr. Warre
observed, that it required no great sagacity to foresee that the fate of this bill would be like that of many other bills of a similar nature, upon which ministers had smiled in the first instance, but from which they had afterwards withdrawn their support. The noble lord opposite would take no measure in favour of parliamentary reform, unless, driven to it by necessity. The noble lord would not agree to carry a single particle of elective franchise out of Cornwall, unless the county were so full that there was no longer room to put a member into it. He (Mr. Warre) was an enemy to all wild and sweeping plans of reform; but they who considered the present system of representation so all wise and all perfect as to admit of no improvement, erred in the other extreme, and he was anxious to avoid extremes of every kind. No one could deny that a
513
Mr. William Smith
rose for the purpose of calling the attention of the noble lord opposite to a point which had been urged by his hon. friend the member for Water-ford, and which the noble lord had not satisfactorily explained. In answer to his hon. friend's argument, founded on the course pursued by the noble lord at the period of the Union with Ireland, the noble lord had alleged that in that case he had been compelled to select. Some members were to be retained, others to be rejected; and population and taxation had been made the criterion; but, if that principle for selection was not the best that could be adopted, why did the noble lord then make choice of it? The noble lord had borne testimony to the soundness of that principle in a way which he would find it extremely difficult to get rid of. When he (Mr. William Smith) recollected that Cornwall at the present moment returned 44 members to that House, he could not but consider it highly objectionable that the elective privilege taken from Grampound should be retained within that
514
l.
s.
Mr. D. Gilbert
explained. He thought that the hon. member could want no assistance from any one to understand the nature of the Cornish boroughs, because, if he was not mistaken, the hon. gentleman had first entered that House as member for Grampound.
Mr. W. Smith
allowed that he did, certainly, thirty years ago, represent a Cornish borough; and if he were to state the mode in which he had been returned for that borough, perhaps the manner of his election would not be sanctioned by the public approbation.
Mr. Bathurst
thought that the question; had hot been placed in the true point of view. It was admitted that some measure was required in order to prevent the recurrence of those practices which had, up to a certain point, prevailed in the borough of Grampound. It was not necessary, however, for that purpose, that the borough should be disfranchised. The; ordinary practice in such cases had been to admit a certain number of new voters,
515
516
Mr. Hobhouse
said, that although this debate had been protracted beyond the time, which, he presumed, it was originally intended to occupy, yet he would beg leave to detain the House a little longer, in order to say a few words which might explain his reasons for supporting the motion of the noble lord. As right hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House had thought it due to themselves, and due to their characters for fairness and candour, to state the reasons of their support to the measure before the House, he trusted they would allow him, in justice to his own character for fairness and candour, to make the same explanations, although they would proceed upon principles totally different from those of the right hon. gentlemen. Upon the present occasion, he thought the House did perfectly right in recognizing, as a principle, that the representation of the people wanted some reform. He should himself have taken the opportunity of submitting a similar proceeding to them before, if he had not thought that the noble lord who introduced the bill might have lost as much by his (Mr. Hobhouse's) alliance in that House as he had lost in the country by the alliance of the noble lord oppo-
517
Mr. A. Moore,
in contending for the propriety of this bill going to a Commit—tee, reviewed the various objections which had been taken to it by hon. gentlemen, and the propositions which had grown out of it. Some of those objections
518
Lord John Russell,
in reply, observed, that he had but a very few words to offer tbthe1 House. He had heard, with great pain the declaration of the noble lord opposite, and he did hope to have heard him, in the course of the debate, retract: what he had said; but in that expectation he was disappointed. At the end of December last, the noble lord would recollect, that he (lord John Russell) had given notice of his intention to bring in a bill to transfer the right of voting from Grampound to Leeds. Not one word of objection was, upon that occasion offered by the noble lord; but he did understand
519
l.
520
Lord Castlereagh
rose to explain. He was fearful that some misunderstanding had occurred between himself and the noble lord: at the same time he had no wish to conceal his real sentiments upon the point to which the noble lord had alluded. He could have wished that the noble lord had felt himself at liberty to remodel his bill upon the principles observed in former cases: but he must contend that he had acted with every public and private candour towards the noble lord.
The bill was then read a second time.
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE—PETITION OF THE WARDEN OF THE FLEET PRISON.]
The Attorney General
presented a petition from John Eyles, Warden of the Fleet, stating, that during the last parliament, in consequence of an order issued by the then Speaker of the House of Commons, he had liberated from confinement in the Fleet prison Robert Christie Burton, esq., claiming privilege of parliament as member for the borough of Beverley. He, the warden, had since
521
PUBLICATION OF PROCEEDINGS IN A COURT OF JUSTICE.]
Mr. Hobhouse
gave notice, that on the 15th of June, he would submit to the House a resolution respecting the right assumed by judges of preventing, by imprisonment and fine, the publication of proceedings in a court of justice. He was sorry that so important a subject should be brought forward by one so little competent to recommend it to the consideration of the House; but he felt himself bound, unless some hon. member of greater weight, or more extensive legal knowledge, would undertake the task, to submit a motion on the subject to the House.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, May 25, 1820.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.]
Lord Erskine
presented a petition from certain occupiers of land in the county of Suffolk, complaining of the state of. Agricultural Distress. The noble lord began by observing, that the petitioners desired him to say that it was not their wish to encroach on the interests of any other class of persons. In his opinion, indeed, all the different classes of the country must thrive together, or not at all, and if any one class expected to gain an advantage by sacrificing the interests of others, they would find themselves grievously disappointed. The petitioners conceived this to be the principle which had been acted on in passing the corn bill. They did not call on parliament to add any thing to their present protection, but they: contended that they were deprived of the advantage which parliament intended to give them by the manner in which the average was struck. They merely wished that some data more fixed and certain; might be adopted for establishing the average, but they by no means desired
522
s.
s.
d.
The Earl of Lauderdale
found that the present petition resembled many others on the same subject already on the table. In fact, it was no wonder that they were all of the same nature, for they came all from the same shop. They were all, he believed, the manufacture of Mr. Webbe Hall, a gentleman who had been circulating pamphlets among the members of that and the other House of Parliament. He could not agree with that gentleman in the principles he laid down. He had supported the corn-bill, but could not support the doctrines now afloat. It had been proposed to indemnify landholders for tithes; as if every man who occupied ground did not previously know that he was to take it. burthened with tithes. He could not help being astonished that the person who had taken so active a part in setting the agricultural interest against the manufactures, should be rewarded by being made secretary of the board of agriculture. Many were of opinion that that board had never done much good, and he did not know any thing that could be expected from them capable of compensating such an appointment. Much had been said about economical reform, with which he did not agree; but if a motion for suppressing this board were to be brought forward, that was a question of economical reform which he should be very much inclined to support.
523
Lord ErsKine
said, he knew nothing of Mr. Webbe Hall, and could not see what that gentleman's opinion had to do with the petition.
The Marquis of Lansdown
presented a number of petitions from the occupiers of land in the county of Wilts. His noble friend must not expect him to be able to say whether Mr. Webbe Hall had any hand in these petitions. He could, however assert, that they came from persons of great respectability and the principal occupiers of land in the county. He had, nevertheless, the misfortune to differ with them, and when the subject should come to be discussed would consider it his duty to take a different view of it. The legislature had not the power of preventing the agricultural interest from sharing in the general distress which affected the country. He was, however, well assured, that those who had signed these petitions would only put their names to statements of the truth of which the were well convinced. To that extent, therefore, they called for their lordships attention, and he presented them to the House as the representations of a very respectable and numerous, and, he was afraid he must add a very distressed body of persons. Ordered to lie upon the table.
CIVIL LIST BILL.]
The Earl of Liverpool
rose to propose to their lordships the second reading of the bill for the support of his majesty's household, and of the honour and dignity of the crown of the united kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Though he considered the subject of great importance, he did not think it necessary to trouble the House with more than a few words on this motion for the second reading of the bill. He should he as short as possible, reserving to himself the right of reply and explanation, if any objection should be made to the motion. In the conversation which lately occurred, in consequence of his being asked, whether he intended to propose any inquiry previous to the consideration of the civil list he stated two reasons for declining to take that course. The first was rather one of precedent than argument—namely, that he was not aware, of an inquiry of such a nature being instituted at the commencement of any Reign. He did not mean that parliament were precluded from doing what had not been done on former occasions, if a sufficient case were made out; but, in the present
524
525
l.
526
l.
l.
Lord King
did not concur with the noble lord in the warm approbation he had bestowed on the bill before their lordships In his opinion, the subject of the civil list
527
l.
l.
528
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
529
The Earl of Darnley
expressed his surprise at seeing that so large a civil list should be proposed for Ireland, considering the means of that country as compared with those of England, without producing a single item to prove its necessity. The civil list of England was 850,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
The Earl of Liverpool,
in explanation, stated, that the sum now fixed on for Ireland was exactly the same as it stood at the demise of his late majesty. That it was not more than the necessities of Ireland required, they had this proof, that no sum had ever been remitted to this country. They had also another fact in corroboration, which was this:—At the time that the civil list of Ireland was in debt, an act was passed, which rendered it compulsory upon the government not to grant any pension above 1,200
l.
l.
530
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, May 25, 1820.
DROGHEDA ELECTION.]
Mr. P. Moore
presented a petition from Mr. Alderson, the agent of a number of electors of the town of Drogheda, which disclosed the following facts:—That James Sweeney, William Moore, and other voters, had, on the 8th of May, caused a petition to be presented to the House, complaining of the return of Henry Metcalfe, esq., to serve in parliament for the borough of Drogheda, and that the House had appointed Tuesday, the 6th of June, to consider the said petition. On the 8th of May, two sureties were ordered to be provided, who were to enter into recognizances for the prosecution of the said petition, in conformity with the act of the 53rd of his late majesty. On the 12th of May, the present petitioner received from Ireland the names of the proposed recognizances, which he immediately notified to the examiner. On Saturday last, he attended the said examiner according to notice, when Mr. Rowland, the agent of Mr. Metcalfe, put in several affidavits, denying the validity of the security which had been tendered. Not knowing whether the complaint extended to only one or to both of the securities, petitioner prayed for time to inquire into the fact, which was granted until this day. He now stated, that he believed the securities proffered to be good and valid; and if further time were given, and copies of the affidavits were allowed, he had no doubt that he could give a full and sufficient answer to the allegations that had been advanced against the securities. Petitioner had applied to
531
Sir J. Stewart
was of opinion that this was a case which did not justify the introduction of a formal motion with respect to it. Neither of the individuals who had been proposed as securities were fit to be received in that capacity. One of them was in the service of an eminent distiller; and the other" was a young man, without house or property. These facts were sworn to by many respectable persons; the affidavits were on the table, and he could see no reason for re-examining those persons.
Sir J. Newport
observed, that the present petition was one of considerable importance to the electors in every part of Ireland. It must be quite manifest to the House, that the elections on the other side of the channel were, in various points of view, different from what they were here. It was much more easy to know, if securities were rejected, whether the grounds of rejection were good, when individuals were on the spot, than where they came from a distant part of the empire. The petitioner in the present instance stated, that he believed, or. examination, the sureties would be found satisfactory; and he wished to introduce other affidavits, contradicting the facts stated on the other side, for the purpose of correcting the impression they, seemed to have made on the examiner; or, if that were refused, he prayed that he might be allowed to bring forward other sureties, which appeared to
532
Mr. Wynn
said, that if the House allowed in this case time for offering new securities, they must allow it in every other case, and petitions might be presented to the House on the very last day of the period described for recognizances, in order to obtain further time to substantiate securities. He knew nothing of the securities in this case, but it appeared probable, from the statement of the hon. baronet, that they would be ultimately rejected. It was fair, however, to allow further time to produce affidavits to establish the securities already offered. The hon. gentleman referred to a decision of the House in a similar case last year.
The Speaker
said, that the case alluded to by the hon. member, referred only to further time for establishing the securities offered. The House were aware that the period allowed for entering into recognizances was 14 days; but in ail cases from Ireland, 14 days more were allowed
533
The motion was agreed to.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.]
Lord Milton
presented a petition from certain owners and occupiers of land in the county of York. It was, he observed, one of the numerous petitions on the part of the agriculturists complaining of the distresses and depressions tinder which they laboured, and praying for relief. He was fully aware that the complaint of distress was not only well founded, but was particular deserving the attention of the House. At the same time he admitted that any interference by the legislature in the price of human food was a subject which should be touched with great delicacy. The petitioners attributed their distresses to the competition of the foreign markets against them, and they prayed that protection from such competition which was enjoyed by the commercial and manufacturing branches. How far the inquiry, a notice of motion for which had been given by an hon. member (Mr. Sumner), was intended to go on this important subject, he was not aware—whether it was to be limited to an inquiry into the capacity of the farmer to bear those burthens to which he washable, or to go more generally into the nature of those burthens which affected all other classes, and of which the farmer, like others, felt the weight. If the object of the hon. member was the more limited one which he had mentioned, he apprehended it would only be considered by the people at large as an attempt to enhance the value of lands, and to raise the price of their produce; but if the inquiry should not only go to the agricultural distress, but to the general distress which affected the whole body of the trading part of the country, then he thought that considerable good might be
534
The petition being read,
Mr. Sumner
said, it had not been his intention to offer any. observations on this subject, or to promote a partial de bate on its merits; but having been alluded to in the observations of the noble lord, he felt it necessary to say a few words in explanation of the object of his intended motion. His object was of a double nature. The first part of it would be exclusively applied to the protecting duty, as it was now fixed. It would be recollected that, in consequence, of an inquiry into this subject in 1815, the legislature had fixed 80
s.
Mr. Curwen
was of opinion that a committee should be appointed, to inquire into the state of the farmers; for if some alleviation of their burthens did not take I place, the growth of corn must be checked, and we should be left entirely at the mercy of the foreign grower. He hoped that, whenever the committee should be appointed, it would consist of both interests; for if it were confined to one, the country would look upon it as of that kind from which no benefit could be derived.
Mr. Coke,
of Norfolk, thought that the system of taxation which had been so long pursued was the chief cause of that distress and depression which were felt by the farmers and other classes. He agreed that the farmer should be allowed a fair remunerative price for his produce;
535
Mr. Ricardo
said, that the object of the petitioners seemed to him to be nothing else than to get a monopoly of the English market. The consequence would be, that the price of corn would be raised, and laid generally on all the other classes. The idea which the petitioners had of protecting duties was a most erroneous one, and would, if acted upon, be destructive of all commerce. If they meant that the countervailing duties should be equal in amount to the difference between the price at which corn could be sold here and that at which it was sold in a foreign market, they went upon a most erroneous principle, and one which, he hoped, would never be introduced. Suppose corn sold here at 80
s.
s.
s.
s.
Mr. Benett,
of Wiltshire, could not agree with the last speaker that it was the wish of the petitioners that an entire prohibition should be made against foreign importation. They did not think that a free importation of foreign corn should be allowed. They conceived, and it seemed to him that they were justified in thinking, that they ought to be allowed those fair protecting duties which were given to other classes; but for doing this, they were accused of illiberality and ignorance of the general principles of commerce. As far as he knew, the object of the agriculturists was not to increase corn to a great height, but to keep it at a steady remunerating price. At present the price was not sufficient to pay taxation and poor-rates. It would be idle to say that the price of corn was the cause of distress among the poor. That distress was occasioned
536
Lord Milton,
on a question so important as the present, felt it necessary to look at the objects and views of the petitioners. He had before stated, that he would not then declare whether he would or would not vote for the appointment of a committee. When that subject came before the House, the way in which he should give his vote would depend upon the nature of the objects which the movers might have in view, upon the members who were to constitute the committee into which it was proposed to enter, and upon the subjects into which the committee were to be empowered to investigate.
Ordered to lie on the table.
REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE OF SCOTLAND.]
Lord Archibald Hamilton
rose in pursuance of the motion of which he had given notice. As he understood that no opposition was to be made to it, he should content himself with stating the nature of the document for which he intended to move, and the reason which induced him to move for its production. The document which he wished to be laid before the House was a document containing the number of persons entitled to vote for counties in Scotland: it was annually made up, and therefore could be obtained without the slightest difficulty. The object for which he wanted it was to afford assistance to himself and to the House in the discussion of a question which he was inclined, from a sense of duty, to submit without delay to their most serious consideration. He believed that it was not generally known in the House on what the right of voting for county members rested in Scotland; and
537
Lord Castlereagh
observed, that as the document now called for was a public one, he had no objection to the production of it. He trusted that no hon. member would at present enter on the subject, as it might lead to a premature discussion, which, on a question like the present, had better be avoided.
Mr. Hume
could not help suggesting to the noble lord, that it might greatly assist his ulterior object, if a distinction were made in the roll, between those superiorities which were mere paper supe-
538
Sir G. Clerk
observed, that the scheme which had been suggested by the hon. member who had spoken last, was not practicable, because in the books in which the names of the voters were enrolled, there was nothing from which it could be determined whether the rent was reserved or not. The distinction which the hon. member wished to draw could only be obtained by the examination of every individual voter for a county in Scotland.
Mr. Hume
said, that he had himself seen a roll in which that distinction had been made.
Mr. Abercromby
thought that a question of greater importance to Scotland could hardly be brought before the House. The distinction which his noble friend had made, between lands held beneficially and those held by superiority, was well founded; but he thought the view which his hon. friend behind him had taken of the subject was not so important as he imagined, because his noble friend had no intention of bringing forward any motion for destroying existing rights. The object of his noble friend was, an extension of the elective franchise in Scotland; and, when the House had been informed of the actual number of voters at present, some measure, he trusted, would be proposed to them, founded on the extension of property and the diffusion of wealth. Some gentlemen might be in the habit of thinking that it was dangerous to change any part of the representative system of the country, as they imagined that the representation of England could not be altered for the better; but he would desire those persons, before they made up their minds on this subject, to consider what was the nature and the extent of representation
539
s.
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that in consequence of what had fallen from the hon. and learned gentleman who had spoken last, he thought it necessary to caution those who were not intimately acquainted with the subject against deciding rashly that the representation of Scotland must necessarily be defective, because it differed from that of England. The two systems might differ materially, and yet each be well adapted to the circumstances of the respective countries.
Sir R. Fergusson
expressed his obligation to his noble friend for bringing forward a subject so disgraceful to Scotland. The caution of his hon. and learned friend not to consider a general reform of the representation of England as necessarily connected with an alteration of the county representation of Scotland, was highly proper; because the two systems were wholly dissimilar in principle and in practice. The other caution of the right hon. the chancellor of the exchequer savored too much of party principle; and he hoped the House would not, in the decision of such a question, be actuated by party views.
The motion was then agreed to.
ALDBOROUGH ELECTION—QUALIFICATION OF MR. ANTROBUS.]
Mr. Fynes
stated to the House the circumstances which had given rise to the petition which he had presented on Thursday from Mr. Green, the agent of Mr. Antrobus. Mr. Antrobus, who had been returned for the borough of Aldborough, was in America on public business at the time of his election, and had not yet returned. A peti-
540
Mr. Denman
did not find that a similar proceeding had ever taken place on a former occasion, and therefore he submitted to the House whether it would not be proper to refer the matter to a committee, which should be instructed to examine into the practice of the House in the case of members being-elected in their absence from the country. If such a proceeding; as the present was not strictly examined, persons might be elected who did not possess the requisite qualifications, or who held previous appointments which disqualified them.
Mr. Bathurst
said, that since the con stitution allowed absent persons to be elected, it would be hard to disqualify them on account of their absence, since any person who chose might insert in a petition that the person so elected was not duly qualified. He was for the original motion.
Mr. Tierney
observed, that the act of parliament explicitly declared, that no person should have a seat in that House who did not possess certain qualifications, and who did not swear to those qualifications, if called onto do so, at the time of his election. This person, it seemed, was at present in America; and if his absence were to free him from the necessity of proving his qualification, a precedent would be established by which persons in the East Indies might be elected, who might continue absent for three years. He observed that in the return this person was designated as residing at Hyde-Park-corner, and if that address were correct, it could easily be ascertained whether he was duly qualified or not. He would not state his opinion on the question at present—he only wished to show that there were difficulties on all hands. The act clearly specified that the qualification was to be given in within fifteen days after notice, and, without violating the provisions of this act, the House could not agree to the
541
Mr. Courtenay
said, that if the petitioner at the time of the election, had called for the production of the qualification, the present difficulty would have been avoided. [Mr. Tierney—"He could not; Mr. Antrobus was not present"] Be that as it might, the right hon. gentleman, he apprehended, was in a mistake when he said the House was called on to dispense with an act of parliament; for, as far as he recollected, the provision in question was not contained in an act, but in a resolution of that House. When a petition was offered against the return of a member, he was bound, within fifteen days, to give in the terms of his qualification, in order that the petitioner might have the best means of opposing him. Now all that was asked at present was, not that the qualifications should be withheld, but that the agent might be allowed to give in the terms of it, in the unavoidable absence of the member himself; and by that course no inconvenience could arise either to the sitting member or to the other parties, nor could he see any of those evil consequences which the right hon. gentleman apprehended.
Mr. Abercromby
thought that in the present case, by adhering to the standing orders of the House, they would frustrate the ends of justice. He wished that, instead of the present motion, the hon. mover had proposed that the petition should stand over to the next session, especially as the whole of the petitions could not be gone through in the course of the present. He should vote for the motion, but should have preferred the postponing of the petition altogether.
Sir J. Newport
said, that the act precisely provided that the qualification should be given in within fifteen days, and therefore the petition could not be postponed without violating the spirit and letter of the act.
Mr. P. Moore
supported the motion, and could not conceive why the inquiry should either be referred to a committee or postponed when they had all the documents before them.
Mr. Calcraft
opposed the motion. If a
542
Mr. Robinson
said, that in the case which the hon. member had supposed, of a candidate's qualification not being satisfactory, that candidate could not be elected, and therefore the evils apprehended could not occur. The hon. gentleman seemed to anticipate that the con sequence of the House acceding to the present motion would be one seriously affecting the constitution of the House. He appeared to think that to dispense with the standing orders of the House upon the present occasion, would be to act in also lute opposition to the reluctance which they at other times manifested to permit any infringement. Thus he had instanced their determination not to permit the interference of any peer in elections; but here was the difference of the cases—that in the latter, instance, to dispense with the standing orders of the House would be to do so to their own wrong; but the question before the House at that moment was that such dispensation should be permitted in order to do right to another. He therefore, thought that as I good and as solid grounds had been laid for such a deviation from forms as could possibly be adduced.
Mr. Denman
had one other objection to make, which, he conceived to be of considerable consequence, namely, that in case Mr. Antrobus should not come home till that time twelve months, it might happen that he would not be bound, by the
543
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
concurred in the opinion that this was a matter requiring attentive consideration; and therefore in order to afford members an opportunity of giving it every attention, he should move that the further consideration of the motion be adjourned until tomorrow.
Mr. P. Moore
found many grounds for supporting the objections which had been taken upon this occasion. It was almost alleged that there was no such person in existence as Mr. Antrobus [a laugh]; there might indeed be such an individual, but on the other hand it was at least requisite, if there were, that his description should be exactly stated.
Mr. Abercromby
observed, upon what had been just remarked by an hon. member, that it was in his power to say there was such a person as Mr. Antrobus, and that he had no doubt he usually lived at Hyde-Park-corner; and if he (Mr. Abercromby) were obliged to describe that individual's residence, he should say it was at that place; but the fact, as it was stated by every person, was this, that Mr. Antrobus was not now at Hyde-park-corner, but in America.
Mr. Calcraft,
although he supposed there could be no doubt that such a person as Mr. Antrobus really existed, maintained that it was clear he had been described as resident in a place where he did not reside This was a point of great importance, and he felt obliged to the right hon. gentleman who had proposed to adjourn the further consideration of the debate.
Mr. Fynes
remarked, that the only difficulty which occurred to him was this: the term which was limited by the standing order of the House for the consideration of these matters expired that day. It might be a question, therefore, how far such a circumstance might affect the proposition of the chancellor of the exchequer.
The Speaker
said, it was perfectly true, that this was the last day which according to the standing orders, was appropriated for these petititions, but at the same time the House must be quite aware, that it was competent for them, without substantially infringing the order of the day, to remedy an inconvenience which they
544
The amendment was then carried without opposition. And on the following day the motion of Mr. Fynes was agreed to.
BOSTON ELECTION.]
Mr. Courtenay
begged to call the attention of the House to a singular case, and one which he considered to be much stronger than that which had just come before them. At the last election for the borough of Boston a gentleman of the name of Ellis had been returned by a considerable majority. The validity of this election was petitioned against by the other candidate, who represented that Mr. Ellis was ineligible under the Grenville act. The consideration of this petition stood for the 6th of June, but it was physically impossible for Mr. Ellis, and that without any imputation of negligence upon his part, to appear by that day. What he should wish would be, that the House should postpone the consideration to a day, the earliest at which it might be possible for Mr. Ellis to be heard. There was this difference between this case and that which had been just submitted to the House; namely, that Mr. Ellis had no agent in this country at all—no one to appear for him. By the 6th of June, there could be no person present to say who should be nominee for Mr. Ellis. It was on these grounds that he should move to postpone the hearing of this petition to some more distant day. The House were in possession of the grounds on which this gentleman's return was opposed: it was, that Mr. Ellis was supposed to have held an office under the Crown coming under the description of offices created since the statute of queen Anne, in consequence of which he was disqualified. It was not his intention to dispute this position, for he believed that that office would be held a disqualification; but at the same time he was far from believing that it was a disqualification against which there might not be good grounds of defence, and it was known that many cases where such defence had been pleaded had arisen under
545
Mr. Tierney
said, that as it had been thought proper that the other motion should be adjourned, he saw no reason why this should not take the same course.
Mr. W. Williams
said, he had always considered a question of this sort one of the greatest constitutional questions ever entertained in that House. It resolved itself into this—whether because Mr. Ellis had chosen to be absent from England for two or three years together, the representation of England was not, therefore, in the mean time to be filled up. He should beg to propose that this debate fee adjourned till to-morrow.
This motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday May 26, 1820.
SUNDAY NEWSPAPERS.]
Lord Kenyon
presented a petition from certain dealers in and venders of newspapers, against the circulation of Sunday papers. His lordship stated that it was in contemplation to bring forward a bill for the purpose of preventing the publication of newspapers en a Sunday, such publication not only being inimical to the interests of religion and morality, but doctrines of a dangerous or seditious nature being put forth in many of the Sunday newspapers.
Lord Holland
declared his intention, if any such bill was presented, of opposing it in every stage of its progress. He was utterly at a loss to conceive upon what ground it was that the principles maintained by some of the Sunday newspapers was put forward as a reason for preventing their circulation. Were not the Sunday papers as amenable to the laws as other journals, if they published any thing improper; and would it not, therefore, be an odious attack upon the liberty of the press to prevent their circulation?
Earl Grosvenor
referred to a motion which he had formerly brought forward upon this subject in the House of Commons, and which motion had for its object to prevent the circulation of Sunday newspapers. He stated that he still
546
The Earl of Lauderdale
thought it right the House should be aware that the object sought by this petition, of preventing persons being employed in newspapers on a Sunday, would not be answered by preventing the circulation of Sunday newspapers; it applied rather to Monday newspapers; all that was requisite for making up a Sunday newspaper being done on the Saturday, whilst a Monday newspaper necessarily required the employment of the persons connected with it on a Sunday.
Ordered to lie on the table.
FOREIGN TRADE OF THE COUNTRY.]
The Marquis of Lansdowne
rose, in pursuance of the notice he had given, to move for a committee to inquire into the means of improving and extending the foreign trade of the country. So much did he feel the importance and magnitude of the subject, that he apprehended no sense of duty, however great, would have been sufficient to induce him to undertake bringing it forward, had he not entertained a well-founded hope of experiencing every indulgence from the House. Under the circumstances, however, in which he thought it necessary to propose to their lordships the appointment of a committee, he did not suppose that it could be necessary for him to say much to justify himself for having assumed that task. He certainly felt most strongly the Weight of the undertaking, and would have been glad to have seen it in the hands of any noble lord more able to do justice to it. Undoubtedly such a question would have been brought forward with much more effect by the members of his majesty's government, from the superior information which they of course possessed; but that course having been declined, he felt it an imperative duty, however incompetent to the task, to call their lordships attention to the subject, interesting and important as it was at all times, but more especially so at the present moment, when the best interests of the country Were so materially involved in the result. Several years had now passed away since the pressure of public distress engaged the attention of every friend to humanity and the country. That the noble lords opposite omitted to propose any measure of
547
548
549
550
"He, like the generous vine, supported lives;
"The strength he gains is from th' embrace he gives."
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
l.
558
l.
l.
s.
l.
l.
559
560
561
562
563
564
l.;
l.
565
The Earl of Liverpool*
rose and said:
*
566
567
568
569
570
l.,
l.
571
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
572
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
573
l.,
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
minimum;
maximum.
581
582
l.
s.
l.
s.
583
584
585
586
587
entrepôt
588
589
590
l.
l.:
l.
l.
l.
591
592
593
594
The Earl of Lauderdale
began by complimenting the noble earl and the noble marquis on the able manner in which they had conducted this important discussion. He concurred in a great deal of what had fallen from both, but especially in what had been said by the noble earl on the subject of the corn laws: nothing could be more prejudicial to the agricultural interest than the annual revival and agitation of that question. His principal reason, however, for rising at present was, because, in some respects, he took a more consolitary view of the situation of the country than either of the noble lords—than even the noble earl, who had given, from authentic documents, such a cheering prospect of the trade of the kingdom, by which, it was evident that that trade had been diminished much less than was generally conceived. When he reflected on the causes operating to produce distress—on the exertions already made to repel the evil—and the small decrease of demand, he could not but entertain a sanguine hope that the deficiency would be supplied through the inquiries of the proposed committee. The noble earl had said, in one part of his speech, that but for the paper currency the war could not have been continued: perhaps not; and perhaps the evil of discontinuance would not have been so great as the noble earl imagined: certain it was, that no other human invention could, in the whole, have produced so much calamity as a paper currency. On this subject he could talk with the noble earl with considerable freedom, because, after the report of last year, in which the noble earl had heartily concurred, it was evident that they thought alike. He begged, therefore, to call the notice of the noble earl to a few figures which indisputably showed the state to which the paper currency had reduced the country; they were contained in some tables, printed in the year 1813, reaching a second edition soon afterwards, and uncontradicted from that time to the present. His lordship here detailed some of the items in these tables, arriving at the conclusion that, in consequence of a paper currency, the nation was now called upon to pay ten millions more annually than if
595
596
Lord Ellenborough
perfectly concurred with his noble friend who made the present motion, that an extension of our foreign trade would be highly advantageous both to our agriculture and to our manufactures. He expressed the great satisfaction which he felt at having heard
597
598
599
Lord Calthorpe
expressed the great satisfaction which he felt at the proceedings of that evening, and at the profound as well as candid manner in which the question had been treated, and the eloquent and statesman-like developement which had been made of the circumstances of the country. There were few circumstances which would tend more to persuade the people that they lived under a paternal government, than the proceedings of that night. As to the Corn bill, he was glad to find it proved that one of the parts of it that had been objected to, the mode of taking averages, contained in itself the principle of self-correction. The principles of freedom of trade, which be was happy to see so fully recognized, were of the utmost consequence; for though, in the present circumstances of the country, a free trade was unattainable, yet their task hereafter was to approximate to it. Considering the prejudices and interests which were opposed to the recognition of that principle, it was no small indication of the firmness and liberality of his majesty's ministers to have so fully conceded it.
The motion was agreed to, and a committee appointed, consisting, among other peers, of the earls of Liverpool, Rosslyn, Darlington, Albemarle, Donoughmore, Lauderdale, Darnley and Bathurst, the dukes of Wellington and Athol, lords Clare arid Calthorpe.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, May 26, 1820.
SUNDAY NEWSPAPERS.]
Mr. Courtenay
presented a petition, signed by certain dealers and venders of newspapers. The petitioners complained that in consequence of the great increase of the Sunday newspapers, and their being exposed for sale on that day, much injury had been
600
Mr. Lambton
said, that he would not object to any set of men approaching that House in a constitutional way. At the same time he could not help expressing his extreme disgust at the hypocritical cant of the petitioners. That the circulation of Sunday newspapers was injurious to public morals, was a doctrine to which lie could not subscribe. He thought that wherever the press laboured to oppose the advances of slavery and corruption, the circulation of newspapers on any day was a moral as well as a constitutional act; but if those dealers and venders thought otherwise, if they felt those conscientious scruples, they might easily retire from a pursuit, which they considered immoral. He could not but condemn the language of the petition; he could not sit silent and hear so gross a charge brought against the Sunday newspapers. Where, he asked, was to be found an immoral of indecent, or seditious Sunday newspaper? He did not know of one. He thought, on the contrary, that the newspapers conveyed instruction, political as well as moral, to the people of England. He thought that the peti-
601
Ordered to lie on the table.
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE—ROB. C. BURTON, ESQ.]
Mr. Wynn presented the following Report from the Committee of Privileges: 1. Resolved, That it appears to this committee, that the action of Christopher Bolton, Robert Gleadow, and Caius Thompson, against John Eyles, esq. warden of his majesty's prison of the Fleet, being founded upon the alleged escape of Robert Christie Burton, esq., from his custody as warden, which escape was no other than a discharge of the said Robert Christie Burton, under the order of this House, of the 28th day of January, 1819, the commencing and prosecuting of the said action is a high breach of the privilege of this House. 2. "That it appears to this committee, that Christopher Bolton, Robert Gleadow, Caius Thompson, Charles Frost, and Archibald Rosser, have been concerned in commencing and prosecuting the said action."—The first resolution being agreed to, it was ordered—on the motion of Mr. Wynn, "That Christopher Bolton, &c. do attend this House on the 5th of June."
BOSTON ELECTION.]
The order of the day was read for resuming the adjourned debate on the Petition of W. Augustus Johnson, esq. On the question being put,
Sir R. Heron
said, that the question before the House was one of the greatest importance, and one with which the House ought not to interfere upon grounds so slender as those advanced by the hon. gentleman who made the motion. The hon. gentleman principally relied on two grounds; first, the absence of Mr. Ellis; and, secondly, that the House could not anticipate a case which would come before a committee. If the last ground were tenable, the House had in fact no case before them at present. It was argued last night, and he believed it was the opinion of most members present, that if the qualification of the absent candidate were called for and not produced at the election, he could not be legally returned; but at the Boston election, the qualification of Mr. Ellis had been demanded, and the returning officer, after consulting with
602
Mr. Wynn
was sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but he thought he was pursuing a very extraordinary course in calling upon the House to discuss the merits of the case in the present stage. That should be the business of a committee.
Sir R. Heron
was obliged to the hon. member for setting him right; but he conceived he was driven into the observations which he had made by the application of the hon. gentleman opposite. He thought it right to refer all to the committee. He was able to prove, by
viva voce
Mr. Tierney
said, that many members did not know upon what grounds the hon. member moved.
Mr. Courtenay
said, that this was a petion which had been fixed for consideration on the 6th of June, and that he, in consequence of the absence of Mr. Ellis, wished to have the time enlarged to the 18th of July.
Mr. Bernal
said, that Mr. Ellis had no authorised agent in this country.
Mr. Tierney
said, that his reason for offering a word on this occasion was, that
603
The Speaker
said, he thought the petition on the table must be disposed of before any member would be at liberty to move for a new writ. The next question was, how the petition could be withdrawn after recognizances had been entered into. By a clause in the 28th of Geo. 3rd, the House could not issue a writ unless the seat were vacated by death or some other cause, which must arise subsequently to the election; and by the 53rd of Geo. 3rd, it was lawful for the House to permit a petition to be withdrawn upon matter which might subsequently arise verified upon oath.
Mr. Bathurst
begged the House to consider that the object of the present motion was only to remove the consideration of the petition from the 6th of June to the 18th of July, a day on which another petition of a similar nature was to be taken into consideration; and it might happen, that the person complained of in that peti-
604
Sir R. Heron
said, he did not undertake to prove that Mr. Ellis was now in possession of the office, but that he did accept it.
Mr. Brougham
said, the House ought to hear all before they made up their minds on the present case. He would suppose this motion was never made; and if he had the same impression on his mind as the hon. gentleman opposite, he should hesitate before he would make such a motion, as the hon. gentleman seemed to be certain that the utmost delay would only tend to show that Mr. Ellis was ineligible. For his part, he thought a greater difficulty existed in point of fact than in point of law. He thought the person who proposed this measure was not a friend to Mr. Ellis. If the committee were ballotted for, and in the act of sitting, he would defy the petitioner to make out his case; and why? His hon. friend said it was an office created since 1795; yes, but it must be proved that Mr. Ellis was in possession of it on the day upon which he was elected. If any member moved for a new writ for a person to serve in the room of Mr. Ellis, it might turn out that some other person was entitled to take the seat. It appeared to him that it should be proved that Mr. Ellis actually held the office on the day of his return for Boston. He thought that could not be ascertained, except by the appearance of Mr. Ellis, or by sending out to the Cape. He did not see the possibility of proving the contents of the petition. The gentleman alluded to had left the Cape a month previous to the election; and he therefore could not say that Mr. Ellis held the office at the time of his return for Boston. It might happen, if a new writ were issued, that
605
Lord Castlereagh
said, he apprehended that official intelligence from the Cape would be sufficient to warrant the committee in coining to a decision on the question, but at the present moment it was quite impossible to have any intelligence of that kind. Me did not think it possible to move for a new writ, now that the case was
sub judice.
Mr. Courtenay
admitted, that considering the office Mr. Ellis held as a notoriously new one, he was inclined to suppose him ineligible; but he had stated that there were many possible ways in which he might have become eligible.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS BILL.]
Lord Althorp
proceeded to describe the principal provisions of the Insolvent Debtors' bill, the seond reading of which he was about to move. In consequence of what had passed with regard to this measure upon a former evening, he felt it necessary to preface his motion with a few observations. It was now universally admitted among candid and considerate men, that the imprisonment of a debtor should not be continued at the will of a creditor, in other words, that a creditor
606
607
Mr. Macdonald
rose, not to oppose the motion, but to make a few remarks upon
608
609
Mr. Bright
thought that some means should be devised to make a distinction, in the operation of the measure before the House, between the case of the honest unfortunate and that of the fraudulent debtor; for it was obviously unjust that the same measure of punishment should be inflicted alike upon all debtors before they could avail themselves of the proposed law. Some scale of imprisonment then, or some criterion of distinction, ought to be established. The cases of fraud and of suffering disclosed before the committee upon this subject forcibly called for such an arrangement. If an accusation of fraud were made by any one creditor, by the practice of the Insolvent Debtors court
610
Mr. Littleton
bore testimony to the excellent conduct of the noble mover, throughout the whole of the investigations and discussions which had taken place upon this question. That conduct was, indeed, the subject of praise in every circle where he heard the question alluded to. He therefore hoped the noble lord would follow his own views upon the mea-
611
Lord Althorp
thanked the hon. gentleman for the compliment which he had thought proper to bestow upon his labours; but he begged it to be understood that whatever he had been enabled to do was owing to the assistance of the very intelligent committee with which he had had the honour to co-operate. He indeed went into that committee comparatively unacquainted with the subject, but he found himself enlightened in the progress of the inquiry, both as to principles and details, by the information and judgment of his able colleagues. He agreed entirely with the hon. member for Bristol, that Crown debtors ought not to be exempted from the operation of the proposed law. But when he mentioned his wish upon the subject in the committee, he found the attorney-general's objections were such that he was afraid of pressing the proposition in that House, lest he should hazard the fate of the bill. With regard to the hon. member's suggestion to authorise the appointment of a jury in certain cases, it was to be recollected that a jury could not be impanelled without expense, and that the petitioners to the Insolvent Debtors' court were generally mere paupers, who had not the means of defraying any expense. Again, it might be apprehended, that if a judge of this court were allowed to call in the aid of a jury, he might feel too much disposed to throw the responsibility, in certain cases, from his own shoulders. Besides, it was to be remembered, that the court alluded to was appointed not so much to, try matters of fact as to decide upon cases or equity. On these grounds he found the objections to the impanelling of a jury in this court so very strong, that he could not persuade himself to make the proposition, notwithstanding his reverence for that noble institution the trial by jury. The appointment of three judges he had been induced to propose from a variety of reasons which to his mind were quite satisfactory, and among others from the experience of the commissioners in bankrupt cases, which cases were so very analogous to those usually brought under the consideration of the Insolvent Debtors' court. When, indeed, the advantages likely to result from the proposed appointments were taken into consideration, be could not
612
The bill was then read a second time.
MOTION FOR THE REPEAL OF THE WOOL TAX.]
Lord Milton,
on rising to submit the motion of which he had given notice, said he felt the difficulty as well as the importance of the duty he had undertaken, from the particular relation in which he stood to the petitioners, and from the great interest which a large body of his constituents had at stake. He might, however, say, with truth, that he was not swayed by the opinion of his constituents, for, whatever had been their sentiments, he should have entertained the same opinions that he now held. Those opinions were not new or speculative, but were founded on principles that appeared to be as immutable as truth itself. It had invariably been our policy to import the raw material of our manufactures at as cheap a price as possible; for he would not admit, that in particular instances, such as in the importation of cotton wool or raw silk, a contrary principle had been acted on: and if, as in the case of cotton a different policy had been pursued, it was only where the particular article of trade could bear an increase of price. It was during the last session, that that principle had, for the first time, with respect to the importation of wool, been departed from; and here he would observe, that there was considerable difficulty in dealing with the question, on account of the different appearances which it assumed; it was a sort of Proteus that changed its face as arguments were addressed to it. He did not mean to say that it had been so stated in that House; but he had seen many persons to whom it had been represented as a measure intended for very different and very opposite purposes; for to some it had been represented as a duty imposed merely for the purpose of assisting the revenue, and to others as a protection to the agriculturists. Now, it was impossible that it could be viewed in both these lights. As a measure of revenue it must necessarily be ineffectual, because at the time this duty was laid on, a greater revenue was derived from the importation of wool than had since been produced. Those who supported the tax might say, that it had not yet had time to be productive;
613
614
615
s.,
s.
616
Mr. Wilson
seconded the motion, and said, that it was necessary that a great manufacturing country should depend upon its exports, to enable it to indulge in the luxuries which were obtained from foreign countries. It appeared to be the general feeling of the House, that a more liberal system of commercial policy should be pursued, and in that feeling he was happy to find that the president of the
617
s.
d.
s.
d.
d.
Mr. Western
thought that the hon. member who spoke last had taken rather too much for granted. If he believed that the tax would prevent the manufacturer from going freely into foreign markets, he should concur with that hon. member in his disapprobation of it. It should not be forgotten, however, that one of the first effects of this duty had been to induce Spain to take off part of her export duty. It was a curious circumstance, that during a period of the most extensive exportation of coarse woollen manufactures, not more than half the quantity of foreign wool had found its way into this country, which came into it at present. In the year 1790, not more than 3,000,000 lbs. of wool had been imported.
618
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that he continued in the same sentiments which he had expressed in the course of the last session, and agreed with the hon. gentleman, that whatever might be the ultimate effect of the measure, no sufficient experiment had yet been made to warrant the proposed alteration. If it was improper, generally speaking, to apply a tax to the raw material, it was a principle no less sound, that by the effect of taxation our natural produce should be supported. The noble lord had adverted in his speech to general principles, as regarded the present question, and if the ordinary rules of political economy could be dispensed with in one case they might be dispensed with in another. That noble lord had stated, that the present measure was sometimes called a measure of protection, and sometimes a measure of revenue; and he had declared, that whatever might be said in its defence upon the one ground, must necessarily operate against it upon the other. Now, he saw no such inconsistency. The article would be a fair article for the support of the revenue; if it could
619
l.
l.
l.
620
Mr. Stuart Wortley
felt that both his noble friend and himself, as representatives of the county in which this great manufacture was principally carried on, would be listened to with some suspicion
621
622
Mr. Huskisson
thought that the hon. gentleman who spoke last had mistaken the meaning of the chancellor of the exchequer as of the abolition of the Spanish export duty. It had merely been stated, that the tax being levied now in England, and not in Spain, went into the treasury of England, and not into the Spanish treasury. He believed it would scarcely be denied, that three-fourths of the foreign wool which was imported into this country was consumed by the population of this country; consequently, if the tax which had existed in Spain was now levied in England, that tax, as regarded the
623
l.
624
625
Mr. Curwen
said, he thought the woollen manufactures, above all others, demanded the peculiar protection of the House, and that a more impolitic tax than the present had never been proposed; for at the same time that it failed to assist the agriculturist, for whose benefit it was said to be laid on, it operated a direct and considerable injury to the manufacturer. Whatever tended to decrease productive labour must be injurious, and this measure was of that description; for it discouraged the woollen trade, which employed a larger proportion of people than any other. He wished that every labouring hand in the country should be productively employed; as many as possible in agriculture, and the remainder in commerce and manufactures.
Mr. Philips
said, he must give the noble lord's motion his support, because he was of opinion that the tax was calculated to prevent exportation, and by no means adapted to relieve the distresses of the manufacturing classes.
Mr. J. Smith
said, that in the present state of the country, he should be unwilling to vote for the repeal of any tax, unless it pressed heavily upon the people, and was peculiarly injurious to their interests. The reason for this unwillingness was the alarm he felt from the present financial state of the country. Any measure tending to lessen the means of supporting the public credit should be viewed with some degree of alarm. He did not, however, feel disposed to continue the wool tax, as he considered it liable to great objections. The cloth manufacture
626
l.
Mr. Barrett
opposed the motion. He did not see how this tax could have raised the price of wool, it being in operation only since October last.
The previous question being put, "That that question be put," the House divided: Ayes, 128; Noes, 202: Majority against lord Milton's motion, 74.
BRITISH MUSEUM.]
The House being in a committee of supply, Mr. Bankes moved, that 10,009
l.
s.
d.
Mr. Colborne
said, that although the country had every reason to expect that a system of economy should, as much as possible, be adopted, still he would not, on an occasion of this kind, be too rigid in pursuing that system. He should be sorry that so important an establishment as the British Museum, which was indeed a national one, should be cramped for want of proper funds. He suggested the propriety of an easier and more general access to the library, which ought also to be put in better order than it was at present. Considerable public advantage had been derived from the readiness with which admission to the other parts of the Museum was allowed, and many individuals had greatly benefitted by it. He could not help regretting that the same liberality was not acted on with respect to other public buildings. He knew not why those who visited Westminster-abbey, St. Paul's, &c., should be obliged to pay for their admission.
Mr. Bankes
said, as the trustees of the Museum had some time since purchased a very large library, which cost a considerable sum, they were determined, oh this occasion, to ask for such an aid as would not bear too hard on the public funds. With respect to placing the books in a more eligible situation, he was afraid it would require a large sum, because the
627
Mr. W. Smith
thought there never was an instance in which the trustees of any institution had more completely seconded the views of parliament than the trustees of the British Musuem had done. The improvements introduced by them, in the last 10 or 15 years, must strike every man who had visited the Museum before and since that time. He conceived it was discreditable to the country, that other public works were not equally open to inspection. Whosoever went to St. Paul's, at the present moment, must pay for admission, as if they visited an exhibition. The only point in which it differed from an exhibition was, that the public convenience was never once thought of by the persons who showed the place. They thought of nothing but the collection of a trifling tax from those who visited the
628
Sir R. Wilson
observed, that the doors of St. Paul's were almost constantly closed. In fact, it was neither ventilated by the air, nor visited by the rays of the sun.
The resolution was agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, May 30, 1820.
CIVIL LIST BILL.]
On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill,
Lord Dacre
rose to move an amendment on the last clause, relative to the droits of the admiralty, and casual duties; and which he had, in consideration of the convenience of the House, refrained from proposing on the report. It was not his present purpose to inquire into the propriety of the grant made by the bill, or to consider whether parliament was bound by what had taken place in 1816. Neither would he discuss the question relative to the comparison of the prices of that period and the present, though he certainly thought such a comparison just, as the difference of the prices was considerable. But it was his intention to bring under their lordships consideration a subject which did not come within the scope of the inquiry of the committee of 1816, as the fund to which he referred was not then directly under the control of parliament. Had such a committee been appointed on the present occasion, they would have been bound to reduce the amount granted to the civil list, or to direct the particular application of the produce of the fund which were the object of the last clause, and one of which, the Admiralty droits, produced before the end of last war 500,000
l.
629
l.
The Earl of Liverpool
agreed in opinion with the noble lord, that parliament were in the year 1816 precluded from the consideration of the droits of the Admiralty, or any other casual revenue of the Crown. He was one who, on questions relative to the civil list, would carry as high the authority of parliament as most persons; but he considered it to be a settled principle, that when once a bill providing for the civil list was passed, parliament could
630
631
l.
Lord Ellenborough
wished that the noble earl had agreed to the amendment. The noble earl had said, that the Admiralty droits produced nothing in peace, but peace might not last long. Nothing could more contribute to the true dignity of the Crown than placing this fund under the control of parliament. Such an arrangement could be no loss to the Crown. The spirit of the constitution inculcated a vigilant jealousy in pecuniary matters. The Crown had the power of making war—parliament of refusing the supplies. But the power of withholding the supplies would be a mere nullity, if the Crown could obtain money by captures. He wished to sec this practice abolished, and that it should be made the interest of a prince to go to war in the manner of a man of honour, and not like a pirate for his emolument. He did not say that this was done, but the principle on which this fund stood had that tendency, by the temptation it held out. The only object
632
The House divided on the question, that the words proposed to be left out stand part of the bill. Contents—present, 51; Proxies, 24–81: Non Contents—Present, 18; Proxies, 3–21: Majority, 60. The amendment was therefore negatived, after which the bill was passed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, May 30, 1820.
PETITION OF THE CORPORATION OF LONDON FOR A REFORM OF PARLIAMENT]
Mr. Sheriff Rothwell presented at the bar, a Petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Commons, of the city of London, in Common Council assembled, setting forth,
"That the great excellence of the British constitution must arise from the independent exercise of the several powers vested in the King, Lords, and Commons; that as the king, by the creation of peers, can add at any time to the members of the House of Lords, if these powers were to unite under evil counsellors, or if by patronage or undue influence they could command a majority of votes in the House of Commons, a despotic power might be established without altering the forms of the constitution; that when the petitioners considered the distressed condition to which the country is reduced in respect both to its agricultural and manufacturing interests, its financial embarrassments and the overwhelming prevalence of pauperism, they are persuaded that for a nation enlightened, honourable, and enterprising, and possessed of vast resources, to have fallen into such a calamitous state, can only have arisen from the want of a due share in the choice of its legislators; that the freedom and purity of election is an essential principle of the constitution, as appears from many of our most sacred laws passed in various periods of our history, especially the third of Edward the 1st, the Bill of Rights, and the second and eighth of George the 2nd,in which it is declared, that the election of members ought to be free; that the election of members of parliament should be free and indifferently made without charge or expense, and that the freedom of election of members to serve in parliament is of the utmost consequence to the preservation of the rights
633
634
Ordered to lie on the table.
AFRICAN COMPANY.]
Upon a petition being presented from the African Company, for the grant of 5,000
l.,
Mr. Gordon
expressed a hope that the prayer of this petition would not be acceded to until the establishments of the company from whom it proceeded should be inquired into by the House. These establishments were professedly instituted, in the first instance, with a view to the civilization of the inhabitants of Africa; but it was known that they were become mere commercial speculations, in which the interest of each of the speculators was much more consulted than the civilization of the negro. These institutions were, besides, not at all under the control of the British government; and under these circumstances, they formed an anomaly which called for investigation, before any of the public money was voted for their use.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that the proposed grant was to repay monies already advanced by the company, in consequence of a proposition adopted by that House upon the recommendation of a committee, as well as upon the report of our admiral on the station. This, he hoped, would be the last year in which any proposition of this nature would be submitted to the House, and it would be satisfactory to the hon. gentleman to learn that all those British colonies or [settlements on the coast of Africa were immediately to be
635
Mr. Gordon
expressed himself satisfied with the explanation of the right hon. gentleman, but declared his wish to have the report of our admiral on the station laid before the House.
Ordered to lie on the table.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.]
Mr. Holme Sumner,
in rising to introduce to the consideration of the House the agricultural distresses of the country, regretted that the subject had not been brought forward by some gentleman more intimately acquainted with its details, and more frequently in the habit of addressing the House. He regretted more particularly that his hon. friend the member for Essex, whose great knowledge upon all questions connected with the agriculture of the country was universally acknowledged, had been prevented by the state of his health from bringing forward this motion, for he was sure it would have been matter of infinite satisfaction to the House, if that gentleman had been able to take the lead on this occasion. It was most necessary, however, that the subject should be brought forward, and he felt persuaded that the agriculture of the country was so rapidly advancing to a state of decay, that unless some measures were taken to stop the total exhaustion of capital embarked in it, ruin of an irretrievable character must fall upon that class of the community who were connected with it. He could not but regret that whenever the agriculturists approached that House to complain of grievances, or petition for relief, the members of the House connected with the manufacturing and commercial interests seemed to think that the gauntlet was thrown down, and that it was necessary to meet any measure which might be proposed for the relief of the agriculturists with the most active opposition. The agricultural petitioners did not come before the House to attack the mercantile or manufacturing interests. He felt that the interests of these three classes were intimately and inseparably connected, and that one of them could not fall into a state of decay without entailing the inevitable ruin of the other. The agriculturists did not come forward to encroach upon the commercial or manufacturing interests, but to claim that protection which the legislature had al-
636
s.
637
638
s.
s.
s.
639
Mr. Gooch
said, that he considered the question to be of the most vital import-
640
s.
s.
641
Mr. Robinson
expressed himself extremely sorry to be compelled to address the House on a subject of such importance, at a time when he was labouring under a degree of indisposition that he was apprehensive would prevent him from making his statement so clear as he wished to make it; and he felt that on that account he must request the idulgence of the House, should he not be so explicit as he could assure them it was his earnest desire to be. Among the various subjects to which the attention of parliament was from time to time directed, there never in his opinion was one which required to be treated with more reserve, and more caution, and he would add, with less frequency than the question which his hon. friend the member for Surrey had just brought under the consideration of the House. On all topics connected with the subsistence of the people, there necessarily prevailed so much apprehension, and he was by no means disposed to deny, so much prejudice, that at all times and in all countries, such topics had been considered as involving matters of peculiar delicacy. So much was he impressed with this opinion that he confessed he felt great regret that the present discussion had taken place. When, at the commencement of last year, an expectation appeared to be entertained that the attention of parliament would be called to the revision of the corn laws, he and his colleagues had felt it to be their duty to state unequivocally their decided conviction that it was not expedient to alter the existing law. In communicating that opinion he had endeavoured to be as explicit as possible, not merely because he thought it his duty to be so, but because he flattered himself that so unequivocal a declaration might lead to the result that
642
643
644
s.
s.
minimum,
s.
maximum.
s.
s.
645
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
646
s.
s.
s.
s.
647
s.
s.
d.
s.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
648
649
650
651
"Defluit saxis agitatus humor;
Concidunt venti, fugiuntque nubes,
Et minax (quod sic voluere) ponto
Unda recumbit."
Mr. Western
thought it was impossible the House could reject his hon. friend's motion. He had the honour to represent a county which was as capable of sustaining the existing pressure as any county in the kingdom, but which was nevertheless exhibiting a declining capital, and other circumstances indicative of much distress. The petitioners to the House did certainly expect some legislative measure more protecting than the act of 1815. For himself, he absolutely disclaimed any intention by legislative enactments to bolster up the value of corn, for the purpose of securing a remunerating price to the farmer. The object which he had always had in view, was to render this country independent of a foreign supply. For the expediency of that policy he had always contended. In 1815, he had maintained that the bill then passed was not sufficient. And so it had proved. The British farmer had not sufficient security and encouragement, or he would, fertilize every acre in the kingdom. In all our former corn laws, the price at which importation had been allowed was always greater than the average price in
652
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.,
s.,
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
653
s.
s,
pari passu
vice versa,
654
s.
Mr. Baring
expressed the satisfaction with which he had heard the speech of I the right hon. the president of the board I of trade. Notwithstanding the want of temper which had been charged upon him on this occasion, he could assure the I House that he would view this question with as much calmness and temper as any member, even the hon. mover, who was so distinguished for coolness and patience, could possibly do. So convinced was he of the impolicy of bringing forward any question which could agitate the public mind, that he felt great reluctance to enter on the subject. He had opposed the Corn bill in the first instance, and he had since had no reason to change the opinions he had then stated. At the same time he was convinced of the general impolicy of disturbing the system on which a great country moved and acted, and which it was highly important that the inhabitants of that great country should think solid and permanent. This consideration had deterred him from saying any thing upon the subject from the passing of the bill to the present time, though it had confessedly turned out, as was predicted to be totally inadequate to give those whose interests it was meant to serve that protection they required; the result had also
655
656
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
657
658
s.,
659
660
661
Mr. Frankand Lewis
agreed, that it was above all things desirable that the law should be made permanent on this subject. He wished for an extended inquiry with a view to some measure that should relieve the farmer from that state of feverish anxiety in which he was kept by a perpetual attention to average and importing prices. A refusal to inquire he did not think the best means of tranquillising the public mind. Some of the petitions prayed for a change in, the general policy of our system, not for immediate relief, under the pressure of difficulty and distress. They claimed only that sort of protection which bad been afforded, in an almost boundless measure, to every branch of our manufactures. They stated that it would be wise, just, and equitable, to extend the same principle to land; and upon their making out this proposition before a committee, they rested their title to the consideration of parliament. If their views and arguments were erroneous, it would be an easy matter to refute them. Unquestionably the same principles of encouragement which applied to manufactures did not apply to agriculture, because the former were susceptible of the highest degree of improvement, and the utmost degree of cheapness; but the latter, when extended, must, by being driven to inferior land, have its produce deteriorated in quality, and raised in price. Unfortunately no interests were more at variance than those of the owner and occupier of land. The landlord had but one object, that of obtaining the highest rent; but the tenant, whatever might be his interest under an existing lease, could derive no advantage from protecting prices when that lease expired. As a permanent system he must lose rather than gain by it, because whatever tended to raise the price of labour must diminish the profits of stock. The present system was evidently injurious to him; for, in the event of an excess or more than an average crop, he could not export to a foreign place, where there might happen to be a demand, till the price fell below the average, not of this country merely, but of that to which he exported. It operated, therefore, as a prohibition on the export
662
s.
663
s.
664
665
Lord Milton
concurred with the hon. gentleman who had just sat down. He had wished, when notice of this motion was given, that it should be introduced with such extensive views, that it should
666
No, no.
667
668
Curwen
669
l.
l.
670
s.
s.
671
s.;
Mr. Ricardo
said, that there was one sentiment delivered by an hon. gentleman in the early part of the debate, in which he cordially concurred, namely, that in legislative enactments, the interest of one body of men ought not to be consulted at the expense of others, but that each should receive corresponding consideration in proportion to its importance. He (Mr. Ricardo) would wish to act up to this maxim, and, because he consulted the interests of the whole community, he would oppose the corn-laws. In many of the observations which he intended to make he had been anticipated by his hon. friend the member for Taunton. The agriculturists had contended that they had a right to be protected in a remunerating price for their produce, but they forget that no remunerating price could be fixed. It was in vain to talk of fixing a remunerating price, which must necessarily change with circumstances. If by preventing importation the farmer was compelled, for the national supply, to expend his capital on poor or unprofitable soils, the remunerating price at which he could keep this land in cultivation must be very high, as compared with the price of grain in other countries, where the soil was better, and less labour was required. Open the ports, admit foreign grain, and you drive this land out of cultivation; a less remunerating price would then do for the more productive lands. You might thus have fifty remunerating prices according as your capital was employed on productive or unproductive lands. It became the legislature, however, not to look at the partial losses which would be endured by a few, who could not cultivate their land profitably, at a diminished remunerative price, but to the general interests of the nation; and, connected with this, he would look to the profits of capital. In his opinion a remunerating price might have been so fixed, that 50
s.
672
s.
673
l.,
674
675
s.
676
Mr. Benett,
of Wiltshire, said the hon. member who had preceded him, had told the House that this country would arrive at a degree of prosperity almost beyond imagination if it could get rid of the National Debt, and the Corn laws. By putting the National Debt first, the hon. member had seemed to admit that it was necessary to get rid of the National Debt before the Corn law could be put an end to. He (Mr. Benett) should not detain the House by entering into any discussion of political economy, because he presumed every member was acquainted with the principles of Adam Smith, which continued the foundation of all political economy to the present day. If we had no National Debt we should certainly want no Corn laws, but while we had debt and taxes, we could not manufacture corn as cheaply as those who were not similarly burthened. They were told that this was not the time to agitate the question of the Corn laws. Every time was, in his opinion, fit to agitate the causes of the national distress, and to perform an important duty to the country, unbiassed by the clamour of any class of the people. He did not advocate, however, the present Corn law, which had thrown odium on the agriculturist, without affording him protection, and he should wish it to be repealed, parliament granting some more efficient protection. The mode of taking the averages was bad; the law left an opening for bribery (that
677
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Huskisson
said, that the great inconveniences of agitating the Corn laws had been so ably stated by his right hon. friend, the president of the board of trade, that he owed an apology for
678
s.
679
s.
minimum.
s.
minimum,
maximum.
s.
d.
s.
s.
s.
s.,
l.,
680
s.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
681
Mr. Coke
said, that representing as he did a great agricultural county, from which many petitions had been presented, complaining of distress, and differing, as he happened to do upon this occasion, from many persons whom he highly esteemed, he could not help expressing his regret that this question had been agitated, as he felt it an imperative duty to declare his disapproval of the motion. Every one who knew him must be aware that he was delighted with agriculture, in the practice of which he had spent nearly the whole of his life; and that he was peculiarly attached to those by whom its interest was
682
d.
683
Mr. Ellice
asked the hon. mover whether he meant to press his motion to a division? He put this question because he understood that some compromise was proposed to the hon. gentleman; and if he did not mean to agree to that proposition he (Mr. E.) should feel it his duty to move the previous question, as it was now evidently the object of those who supported the motion before the House to produce an aggravation of the evils under which the country laboured, in consequence of the system of the corn laws.
Mr. Sumner
observed, that he could not see that any good result would be produced by any such compromise as the hon. gentleman had alluded to.
Mr. Ellice
then moved the previous question.
Mr. Mansfield
maintained, that the object of the motion was, to raise the present protecting duties on corn. Agreeing with the hon. member for Coventry, he should very cordially second the motion for the previous question. Being the representative of a place of large manufactures, he felt it his duty to state, that however great the distress of the agriculturists, the distress of the manufacturers was much greater. He regretted that the hon. member had not also moved for a committee to take the situation of the manufacturers into consideration, for he would then have given him his entire support.
Mr. Brougham
apologised to the House for rising at that late hour, but he could not, consistently with the duty which he owed his country—consistently with the respect due to the agricultural interest, and to the numerous body of persons whose petitions crowded from every quarter, and covered the table of the House, give a silent vote on the present motion, after hearing the very extraordinary motion of the previous question made by the hon. member for Coventry. He could conceive the reasons why some gentlemen, after gravely weighing the question, and yielding to the subtleties of the hon. member for Portarlington, or to the ingenuity of the hon. member for Taunton, should determine to meet it on its merits, and to decide manfully upon it; but of all the ways which he could possibly imagine of getting rid of the question, he should least think of that proposed by the hon. mem-
684
685
l.
l.,
686
687
s.
s.
688
689
s.;
Mr. Gipps
said, he held in his hand an amendment, which was to the effect, that a select committee be appointed for the purpose of ascertaining the mode best fitted for ascertaining the average price of corn. He should think it his duty to put this, unless the hon. member withdrew his motion for the previous question.
Mr. Ellice
said, the reason why he moved the previous question was, that a member who had followed the hon. mover, had, as he thought, laid before the House a motion not consistent with the views of the hon. member for Surrey. He therefore proposed the previous question; but he was far from wishing that the prayers of a suffering people should not be attended to. He would therefore, with the permission of the House, withdraw the motion for the previous question.
On the motion for withdrawing the previous question being read from the chair,
General Gascoyne
said, that there was scarcely a member present who" was not aware, before he entered the House that evening, that he intended to move the previous question. So strongly was he opposed to the appointment of a committee for the purposes intended by the hon. mover, that if such committee should be appointed, and any measure be carried upon its recommendation, he should feel himself bound to make an attempt to repeal that measure, or at least to bring the subject again under the consideration of the House. After this explanation, the House would not be surprised at his objecting to the motion for the previous question being withdrawn.
Mr. Corbett
was not sanguine in his
690
Lord Castlereagh
rose, not for the purpose of entering into any further discussion, but to call the attention of the House to the question which now stood before them. The member for Surrey had proposed to refer all the petitions to the consideration of a select committee, with a view of entering into the whole subject, and effecting a complete alteration of the scale of protection settled in 1815. Agreeing as he did with his right hon. friend the president of the board of trade, and with his right hon. friend on his left, it was immaterial, in his view, whether the proposition of the member for Surrey were got rid of by a direct negative, or by the previous question. Either of these courses would equally effect his object of not going into a general view of the agricultural state of the country. At the same time he did not wish to preclude any other hon. member from adopting the suggestion of his right hon. friend, the president of the board of trade: he was ready to give his support to a motion for a committee, not to enter into so large a field of inquiry as would tend to alter the scale of protection adopted in 1815, but to inquire whether, by fraud or evasion in the mode of striking the averages, the provisions of the Corn bill had been defeated. The suggestion of the hon. and learned gentleman would open the whole question of the scale of protection, and if the averages were taken upon a survey of the whole surface of the united kingdom, an alteration of 6
s.
s.
Mr. Alderman Heygate
thought that the Corn laws required to be reconsidered, agriculture having been much affected by the bullion question. He would, however, oppose any rise in the average price of corn, or any tax on capital in trade, which was equally depressed with agriculture, and in his opinion from the same cause.
Sir T. Acland
supported the motion in its broadest manner. He considered the question to be a double one, and thought that the House ought to unite in taking the question relative to the distress into consideration, although the question re-
691
Mr. V. Fitzgerald,
as a member from Ireland, wished to say a few words in favour of the agricultural interests of a country which appeared to be neglected. He thought that the distresses of the people merited the serious attention of the House.
Lord Milton
lamented the decision the House had come to, and entreated them to defer the nomination of the committee on account of the lateness of the hour.
Mr. Having
expressed his apprehension that the decision of the House that night would tend to show the people the perilous state they were in, and produce the greatest dissatisfaction. The House having come to this unexpected, and, in his mind, lamentable decision, he thought a fitter time than the present should be appointed for choosing the members of a committee upon which so much would depend. He therefore proposed that the further consideration of the subject should be adjourned till to-morrow. He trusted the decision of that night would convince those whose opinions agreed with his own of the necessity of watching this proceeding strictly; and, for his own part, he pledged himself to oppose it in every stage.
Sir R. Wilson
seconded the motion of adjournment; and, feeling anxious for the tranquillity of the country, and knowing the effect which this decision of the House would produce, he implored them
692
Lord Castlereagh
said, he had intended himself to make the motion which the hon. gentleman had just made. He deplored and lamented from the bottom of his heart the decision of the House. So-little had he anticipated such a result, that, being asked by several persons whether he thought there was such a difference of opinion as would make it necessary for them to remain in the House till-the division, he had told them that nothing was so unlikely, from the temper which the House had evinced during the debate, as an effective support of the motion. If he had thought that it would have had so many supporters, there would have been a very different attendance of members, and a very different result.
Mr. Brougham
lamented the necessity of differing from his gallant friend on any subject, but more especially on a subject so delicate as the present. He did not say it was so in itself, but the hon. gentlemen made it delicate by the manner in which they treated it. He would ask if any thing had fallen from the hon. mover, or from any of those who had supported his motion, that could warrant the belief that they wished to introduce a new system of corn laws? for it had been held out to every man in England, Scotland, and Ireland, that the object of this committee was, to raise the price of bread. He himself had said over and over again, till he had nauseated the House with the repetition of the argument, that he was, in the first instance, for granting no farther assistance to the agriculturists than they had been formerly acknowledged by the legislature to be entitled to.
Mr. Sumner
said, that the decision of the House had taken him as much by surprise as it seemed to have taken others; for, however convinced he was of the propriety of the measure be proposed, he had not thought that any proposal he could make to the House would have been so favourably received. As to the nomination of the committee, he had before the division communicated, with the noble lord, and they had showed each other their committees, in which there was only a difference of three names.
693
Lord Castlereagh
said, that when the hon. gentleman showed him his list, he compared it with the list which his right hon. friend had prepared, with the view of adopting the measure for a limited inquiry, thinking that only such an inquiry would be granted, he had paid little attention to the list.
The motion of Mr. Baring, "That this debate be adjourned till this day," was then agreed to; and at four o'clock in the morning the House adjourned.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, May 31, 1820.
PRISONERS FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT.]
Lord Althorp
presented a petition from several persons who were confined in the prison of the Fleet for contempt of the court of chancery. One of these persons was a woman 81 years old, who had been confined for contempt 31 years. Another person was 64 years old, and had been confined 19 years; another was 60, and had been confined eight years. There was another person who would have signed the petition, but he was in a dying condition, partly, it was supposed, on account of his confinement. He presented this petition the more willingly, in order to show the necessity of extending the provisions of the Insolvent Debtors act to persons confined under contempt.
The petition was brought up and read. The petitioners prayed for relief, by being put on the same footing as other debtors.
Mr. Bennet
bore testimony to the severe suffering of many persons confined for contempt of the court of Chancery. He had known instances in which the parties had, after long imprisonment, endeavoured to purge themselves from contempt, but had no means of doing so, the parties being all dead, and the cause quite forgotten. The best mode of preventing this unjust suffering, would be that the noble lord at the head of the court, should bring all the cases under his review once or twice every year.
Mr. Lockhart
observed, that there would be an anomaly in bringing the persons committed for a contempt of a superior court under the review of an inferior judge; and this would be the case, if the persons thus confined were put in the situation of insolvent debtors. Some of the prisoners, too, were committed, not for non-payment of money, but for re-
694
Ordered to lie on the table.
EXCHEQUER BILLS.]
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that it was usual, when any bargain had been concluded between the Treasury and the monied interest, that he should take the earliest opportunity of stating the terms of it to the House. He therefore wished it to be suffered that the committee of ways and means should have precedence, that he might now state the terms of a bargain which he had concluded.
The House having resolved itself into a committee of ways and means,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, it was necessary for him to explain the reason why he had thus suddenly, without previous notice, risen to state the terms of the bargain which he had concluded on the part of the public. He had allowed three days for the operation of funding exchequer bills under the terms of his offer; and he thought he should have been enabled, before the conclusion of it, to give notice that he should state the terms of his bargain on Friday. But the whole business for which he had allowed three days had been transacted in half an hour; and as it was the invariable practice to take the earliest opportunity of stating the terms of such bargains, he had preferred doing so without notice, to the delay which a notice would have Occasioned. He did so with the more satisfaction, because he could recommend the bargain as one evidently advantageous to the public. It differed in one circumstance, indeed, from any similar bargain which the public had ever concluded, viz. in this—that the stock to be created was less than the actual sum of capital debt to be extinguished. He had a few days ago issued a notice, that a subscription would be opened for funding seven millions of exchequer bills. Oil the 1st of January the outstanding Exchequer bills had amounted to 35 or 36 millions, and four millions of Irish Treasury bills, making 39 millions of unfunded debt, which was ten millions less than the unfunded debt at the same period last year. Of those 39 millions, about 14; millions in Exchequer bills were in the hands of the Bank of England, and all the Irish Treasury bills were in the hands of the Bank of England and the Bank of
695
l.
l.
l.
A resolution to that effect having been put,
Mr. Grenfell
said, that the right hon. gentleman appeared to feel much satisfaction at the subscription having been concluded in a few hours instead of three days. The
696
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that with respect to the first point to which the hon. gentleman had spoken, there would have been much complaint it previous notice had not been given for some time. The right hon gentleman then spoke of a different mode of managing the business, which would ensure perfect quiet and prevent any crush, by omitting a long previous notice, and thereby preventing a fair competition; but that plan would not have answered. He hoped, however, nothing of the kind alluded to would again occur. It was certainly desirable to obviate any crush or personal inconvenience. With respect to the second point, and the most important, he conceived that the hon. gentleman had not understood him. He had distinctly stated that the unfunded debt on the 5th of January last was 39,000,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Maberly
bad no intention of making any comments upon the bargain which had taken place that morning, but could not help observing that he did not understand the statement made by the right hon. gentleman, that the whole amount of the unfunded debt on the 5th of January, 1820, did not exceed 39,000,000
l.
697
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
698
Mr. John Smith
did not understand that any answer had been given by the right hon. gentleman opposite to the question asked by the hon. member for Penrhyn, whether 7,000,000
l.
699
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
asserted, that no preference had been shown to any individuals, and argued, that the long notice which had been given of the terms of this loan was a proof that no partiality had been exercised in any quarter. Since Friday last, every man in London knew how this loan was to be effected; and the conducting of the preparatory steps to it had been intrusted to the Bank directors, whose upright and impartial conduct upon all occasions nobody would dispute. He then proceeded to state, that he had no doubt but that the hon. gentleman would perceive that the transaction of transferring the supplies for the service of the year 1819, to the service of' the year 1820 could give no assistance to the general finances of the year, inasmuch as it could give the government no power to create fresh exchequer-bills. A reduction of 10 or 11 millions of exchequer-bills, from 39 to 28 millions and a half, had certainly been made; and if the hon. gentleman looked again into the papers presented to the House, he would find the statement which he had made to be perfectly correct.
Mr. Maberly
said, that he supposed the chancellor of the exchequer had declined to give an answer to his question, because it had not been worded with all the nicety and exactness of a special pleader. He was no lawyer, but still he would endeavour to put his question for once with special pleading accuracy. He therefore
700
Mr. Peirce
vindicated the conduct of the Bank, and its agent, with regard to the transaction of this morning.
Mr. J. Smith
disclaimed any intention of casting the slightest reflection upon the Bank. He recollected a similar confusion some years ago, and from a suspicion of unfair practices, the transaction was referred to the examination of a committee, one of whom he happened to be, and the committee found that there was nothing of unfair preference. The confusion, indeed, arose from a trial of physical strength to get in, which, of course, respectable men would avoid; and therefore some measure should be taken, on a future occasion, to guard against such conduct.
Mr. Grenfell
perfectly agreed with his hon. friend as to the necessity of keeping up the consolidated fund, and not suffering it to go into arrears of seven millions and a half annually, to cover deficiencies of loans and exchequer bills. He thought there was something extremely unintelligible in the plans of the right hon. gentleman. All he understood of those plans in effect, was, that each quarter there were certain sums advanced by the bank, for which they were allowed to take possession of the growing produce of the revenue.
Mr. Ellice
observed that if he understood the remarks of the right hon. the chancellor of the exchequer, his object
701
Mr. Maberly
repeated his question respecting the amount of exchequer bills remaining unsold in January last; stating his intention, if not distinctly answered, to bring forward a distinct motion upon the subject.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the exchequer bills voted in 1819, were issued to replace those of 1818; so that this issue formed no addition whatever to the unfunded debt.
Mr. Maberly
asked, why did not the right hon. gentleman give a plain answer to a plain question, as to the amount, of the exchequer bills unsold in January last, whether issued to replace those of IS 18 or not? The right hon. gentleman's mode of answering was indeed complete special pleading.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
declared, that the only answer which he could give to the hon. member's question, whether it was special pleading or not, was simply this, that it was not in his power distinctly to answer it, because be did not recollect the precise amount of the bills alluded to.
Mr. Baring
asked when it was intended by the Bank to issue the new notes which had been so long looked for, or whether the sort of note to be manufactured was yet determined upon?
Mr. Courtenay,
as one of the committee upon this subject stated, that the machinery for executing the notes alluded to, was constructed in the Bank, and that every practicable expedition was using to prepare the notes. He added that there was now no uncertainty whatever with respect to the sort of note to be issued.
Mr. Peirce
said, that some of the new notes would be struck off in a few days, but as a great quantity must obviously be manufactured before any were issued, it was impossible to say at what time their issue would commence.
702
Mr. Baring
did not at all doubt the diligence of the Bank upon this subject, but he could not see the propriety of the delay contemplated before any of the new notes were issued, as it did not appear to his mind necessary to provide at once for the exchange of all the old notes.
The Resolutions were agreed to.
PETITION OF GEORGE DEWHURST COMPLAINING OF ILL TREATMENT IN LANCASTER GAOL.]
Mr. Whitbread
presented a petition from George Dewhurst, now a prisoner in the Castle of Lancaster, complaining that he had been confined for two months upon a charge of high treason, and during that time confined to hard labour, and compelled to wear the felon's dress. The charge of high treason, was afterwards abandoned, and he was subsequently tried and convicted of a misdemeanor. The petitioner further complained, that he had not been permitted to give bail upon the charge of misdemeanor, and alleged that he had been innocently led into attending a meeting on the 15th of November, 1819, which was the charge upon which he was convicted.
Lord Stanley
said, he did not rise to offer any opposition to the motion for laying the petition on the table, but to defend the character of the person who had the charge of the castle of Lancaster. The noble lord proceeded to remark on the humanity of that individual, and read a copy of an order issued by the magistrates of the county, by which a discretionary power was given to the gaoler of imposing solitary confinement, and other restrictions, on those prisoners who refused to work, or to comply with the other regulations of the prison.
Mr. Bennet
said, there was no law by which a man could be compelled to work even after sentence, unless for certain crimes, or when that sentence was expressly awarded. Then, as to wearing gaol liveries, every one knew the main object of wearing such clothes was, to prevent disguise, and therefore to narrow the facilities for escape. But for this there was also no law. What would any gentleman committed on a criminal charge think of being obliged before trial to wear a felon's dress? And no one could say when it might be his case—in a case of duelling for example. But such might be the case if they were confined in certain gaols throughout the country, He
703
Dr. Lushington
considered the statement of the noble lord to be an aggravation rather than an extenuation of the wrongs complained of by the petitioner; and he further considered the magistrates who had issued such an order as that under which he was rendered liable to their infliction, as principal parties included in the charge. So much had the question of imprisonment been discussed within the House, that he was astonished the magistrates had taken so much upon them. He might be excused if, on this subject, he expressed himself with some little warmth; but he asked his noble friend what justification he set up for the conduct pursued towards the petitioner? Why, forsooth, the petitioner had refused to wear the livery of the gaol, and the order under which the gaoler acted gave him a power of punishing the offender, and why?—"for setting a bad example." Well, and was the petitioner guilty of any offence? No. He was as yet untried, when he was forced to hard labour, and to the wearing of a gaol livery; he was in that situation in which the law pronounces every man to be innocent. But such were the circumstances under which not only the petitioner, but every other person committed to the gaol of Lancaster might be subject to such arbitrary indignities. When parties were found guilty of a crime of magnitude, it might be proper to oblige them to labour; but when they considered that for an imputed crime, any hon. member might be sent to gaol, ought they not to look to the manner in which magistrates exercised the almost boundless power which was vested in them Did any man in the present day mean to say, that he might not be committed to a gaol where such orders were enforced, and be committed for no offence whatsoever? Let them look at the discretion vested in the gaoler, so powerful an officer in the present day, and they would find how much was committed to him. Either before or after trial he could enforce hard labour and the gaol livery on any prisoner. After what he had said, he wished to guard himself against the possibility of that misrepresentation. He wished generally that the prisoners should
704
Lord Milton,
in adverting to the arbitrary and degrading treatment to which the prisoners were subjected by this order, expressed a wish that his noble friend had been in that situation, which would have given him a control over the magistrates at the time this order was made, for in that ease he was sure that such a proceeding would never have taken place.
Mr. Bootle Wilbraham
said, that of the existence of this order he had been perfectly ignorant till the present moment. From its date it appeared to have been made in the year 1800; and he had no hesitation in saying that he disapproved of it. At the same time there could not be a stronger proof that it had not been much acted on, than the circumstance of this being the first time that it had been complained of, or that the House had heard of its existence.
Mr. Scarlett
said, he had reason to believed, from what he knew of the individual who had the charge of the castle of Lancaster, that there did not exist in the kingdom a man in the situation of gaoler who deserved more praise for the manner in which he treated the prisoners under his charge. This petitioner had been convicted of attending an unlawful meeting; and he was surprised to see it stated in the petition that the meeting had been quiet, and peaceable. It had on the contrary, been proved that many of the persons who attended it had arms with them, and that when the soldiers appeared they took off the pikes which they had before fixed on their staves.
Mr. Blackburne
begged to add his testimony to the exemplary character of the gaoler.
Lord Folkestone
said, that general testimony respecting the character of an individual could not prevail over the evidence of particular facts. He hoped the petition would be printed, not solely on account of the treatment which the petitioner had suffered while in confinement, but because he had been committed by the magistrates, and detained in prison for two months, on a charge of high treason, after which notice had been given to him, that he was to be tried for a misdemeanor only. His prison dress had then been changed, and he had been put into a different yard. But the object to which he wished particularly to advert was, the wish
705
The Attorney General
was astonished to hear the noble lord make such an assertion as that magistrates or justices of the peace had not the power to commit for high treason, because, on former occasions, he had heard the noble lord, in discussing questions connected with the laws of the country, evince a degree of legal knowledge which he should have thought would have prevented him from falling into such a mistake. The learned gentleman said it was distinctly laid down in Bum's Justice that a magistrate had the power of committing for high treason.
Lord Folkestone
would not dispute on legal points with the learned gentleman, but he had thought it was explicitly declared in the book to which the learned gentleman had referred, that a magistrate or justice could not commit for high treason, and that felony was the highest crime within the commission of the peace.
The petition was ordered to be printed.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS—COMMITTEE APPOINTED.]
Mr. Holme Sumner moved the order of the day for resuming the adjourned debate on the motion for appointing a committee on the agricultural distress. The Speaker put the question—"that Mr. Holme Sumner be a member of the committee." Upon the suggestion of Mr. Baring that it would be more convenient that the committee should, in the first instance, be named generally, the Speaker read over the names of Mr. Holme Sumner, Mr. Forster, Mr. Canning, Mr. F. Robinson, Mr. V. Fitzgerald, Mr. Huskisson, the Lord Mayor, lord Milton, sir J. Newport, sir T. Ackland, Mr. Irvine, Mr. Western, Mr. C. Dundas, Mr. J. Benett, Mr. Baring, Mr. Brougham, Mr. Coke, Mr. Gooch, and Mr. Frank-land Lewis. On the name of Mr. C. Dundas being put from the Chair,
Mr. Baring
rose, and observed, that he could not allow even the reading of the names to be concluded without expressing his decided opinion that a committee so formed could not leave a moment's doubt
706
Sir J. Newport
did not think the hon. member at all justified by the fact in the remarks he had made: if he (sir J. N.) entertained the same opinion of the committee, he would unquestionably refuse to belong to it. He should enter upon the inquiry with a firm conviction that it was his duty to point out such measures as, while they relieved the agriculturists, would not only not injure but advantage, every other class; and if he thought that the other gentlemen named would not commence the subject with the same disposition, he would not act with them.
Mr. Sumner
complained that he had not been quite fairly dealt with. The hon. member had desired time last night for the choice of the names to which he intimated that he should not object, under these circumstances an objection from him came rather ungraciously. Besides he had no right whatever to stigmatise the supporters of the inquiry, and to hold them up to the country as a source of alarm. He believed the members he had selected; for the committee were as fair and honourable men as could be chosen, and were as little calculated to excite public alarm as the hon. gentleman himself. He could only say, that it was impossible for him to know with any precision the sentiments of others; but as far, as he had been able to arrive at any degree of certainty upon the subject, he could assert that he had only done what it would have been absolutely foolish in him not to have done in the situation in which he stood; that is, he had procured for himself a fair majority [a laugh]. Was it to be supposed that he should propose a committee with a majority against himself?
707
Mr. W. Smith
said, that when he voted last night in favour of the committee, all he meant was, that he could not reconcile to his judgment or to his feelings to refuse to so large a proportion of the inhabitants of the country an inquiry into a subject which appeared to them to be of so much importance. He did not know how to say to the agriculturists, who stated themselves to be starving, "we will refuse to take your case into consideration." He had never intended by his vote to hold out an expectation that the committee would be able to grant a partial relief beyond what the agriculturists at present enjoyed. If the cultivators of the soil could make out a case, he did not wish to deny them the opportunity; but when the hon. member for Surrey mentioned, that he had taken care to appoint a committee which would give him a decided majority, he went a little farther than he (Mr. Smith) intended to proceed. There were two questions; first, whether the case should be taken into consideration—and upon that point the hon. gentleman was undoubtedly in the right to make out a list of members who would entertain the subject; but if he endeavoured on the second question, the relief that ought to be granted, to secure a majority for the purpose of changing the present system, and rendering it more favourable to the landed interest, then he contended, it was not such a committee as the House ought to appoint. The right hon. baronet had insisted that the members were as fair and impartial as any that could be selected. He did not mean to say that any gentleman would act unfairly according to his own views of fairness; but if 12, or 13, or even if 11 gentlemen out of 21 entered upon the inquiry with a full conviction that more relief ought to be granted to the farmers, the report would, of course, be accommodated to their views of justice and propriety.
Mr. Sumner
declared, that in the expression that he had secured a majority in
708
Mr. Calcraft
said, that when he had voted against the appointment of a committee, he was aware that a certain degree of distress prevailed among the agriculturists, but he could not conscientiously consent to inquiry, when he heard its advocates talk of nothing but relieving the country at large by increasing the price of corn. He had, in fact, refused it entirely on this ground. When, too, the hon. member for Surrey, by gaining a majority, had become, as it were, in his own person the government of the country, and had taken upon himself to name his own committee for his own purposes, he took it for granted that he would appoint such gentlemen as were favourable to his views: on that very ground he had felt alarm, and on that ground he thought that alarm would be felt throughout the country. As to the distress of the agriculturists, though he was convinced that it existed, he was convinced also that it had been extremely exaggerated. He had gone through various parts of the country, and he had had intercourse with gentlemen largely concerned; and from all he could see and hear he was satisfied that this extreme agricultural distress was never heard of but within the walls of the House [Hear, hear!]. He used the words "extreme distress" purposely, for he remembered that the hon. member for Essex (Mr. Western) four or rive years ago, had made an admirable speech upon the subject, had given details from different parts of the country, had dwelt upon the number of farms that were unlet, upon the executions in the houses of broken agriculturists, and of the amount of rent remaining in arrear; but where were such statements to be found, on the present occasion? He must say, that he had never heard a case more partially stated; nothing but corn was talked of, though he should like to know whether the stock-farmer had not been prosperous: if the grower of grain had been unfortunate, what was the state of the breeder of cattle; and had he been an equal sufferer? He would only add, that, though he would not turn a deaf ear to the number of respectable petitioners who presented themselves, yet he thought it was matter of alarm to the nation that such a vote had been passed as that of last night.
709
Mr. Brougham
suggested, that it might be convenient if hon. gentlemen would confine themselves to the question really before the House. This was not the ordinary case, where form was of no importance, and substance every thing: the substantial question regarding the instruction to the committee would presently be introduced; for he now learnt with surprise, that the vote of last night was to go for nothing, and that a new discussion of the whole subject was to be invited: if the division and majority were indeed to be passed over he could not help it; he was ready to debate again, and to divide again only he sincerely hoped that the result would be the same. He trusted that gentlemen would so far consult the convenience of proceeding as to confine their remarks to the point of nomination; to the formation of the committee merely, for that was all that was now before the House. In his opinion, it was a great mistake to assert that eleven or even ten of the members selected, were in favour of extended relief: he had looked over the list, and could assert that there was a bare majority of those who were disposed only to inquire. The hon. members for Devonshire and for Waterford and himself were pledged only to the extent of inquiry in deference to the claims and great interests of the petitioners. They were by no means sure that any relief ought to be granted; and he mentioned this fact only to show how erroneous the impression was that the majority of the committee had pledged itself to raise the price of corn. He had been astonished at the merriment excited because the hon. member for Surrey wished to secure a majority. Suppose he were in a minority, the result would be, that on the first meeting of the committee, the chairman would be directed to report progress, and not to ask leave to sit again; or even if the numbers were equally balanced, nothing could be done, and the matter must be left in a state of neutrality and inaction. A majority was thus absolutely necessary. He pledged himself that nine gentlemen of the committee were absolutely opposed even to inquiry, and such being the fact, could any man assert that a fairer committee had been ever struck?
Mr. C. Dundas
declared, that if he did not consider that the interests of the agriculturist and the interests of the manufacturer were inseparable, he would not consent to act as a member of the committee.
710
Mr. Bright
observed, that he found his name among those whom it was proposed to appoint on the committee. If it were imperative on him to attend, he would certainly do so; but after the declaration of the hon. member for Surrey, that he had secured a majority, if be could by any possibility decline being on the committee he would; and he therefore put it to the courtesy of the hon. gentleman to excuse him. It appeared to him that the hon. gentleman had let out the whole mystery of appointing committees; and, as a young member, he had received a lesson that night which he should not readily forget.
Mr. Bankes
objected to wandering from the simple point at issue, and expressed his approval of the nomination of Mr. C Dundas.
Mr. Spooner
felt a strong objection to the composition of the committee, as on looking over the list of names he found that not one member from the great manufacturing counties of Warwickshire, Staffordshire, or Lancashire, had been included. If any good were to be derived from the inquiry, which he greatly doubted, it must be accomplished by conveying to the public, that it had been conducted by those who were most competent to give the great subject a fair, full, and dispassionate investigation. Two points were to be considered; first, if relief were necessary, and next if that relief could be supported by the manufacturing interest. If the committee came to the conclusion that a high price for grain would relieve the manufacturers, he hoped it would not be done without at least the show of justice, by adding some members connected with the great counties he had mentioned.
Mr. Maxwell
said:—It would be unfair to the hon. mover, if I did not state that one of the members of the manufacturing counties was nominated in his committee, before I requested that my name might be erased. Feeling, as I do, that no method is fair, just, or efficacious, but that obtained by a protecting duty, I thought myself unfit to be a member of a committee, whose avowed object was, to adhere to the principle of prohibition. No wish to avoid the unpopularity which it might have given me, would have had the smallest influence in leading me to this resolution, because I am confident, that the petitions of the agricultural classes particularly demand our consideration and our regard, these constituting the great market for manu-
711
712
The motion was agreed to. On the question that Mr. Bright be a member of the committee,
Mr. Sumner,
adverting to the wish expressed by that hon. gentleman to be excused from the committee, observed, that he had not the honour of knowing him, but that he had named him because he understood he was a man of talents, and because he was a member for Bristol. On the same principle he had nominated Mr. Canning and the Lord Mayor. He repeated his explanation, that in using the word "majority," he had merely meant a majority of persons disposed to inquire into the subject.
Mr. Bright,
in explanation, said, he waved his objection to serve on the committee.
General Gascoyne
said, there was no member of that House to whom, individually, as a member of the committee, he should object. His objection was to the constitution of the committee altogether. It was of the highest importance for the public to be convinced that the committee was selected in the most impartial way; and the mode he proposed was by ballot [cries of No, no]. Gentlemen might say "No, no;" but let the question be put, and they would then have an opportunity or supporting their negative. The feelings and even the prejudices of the public must be consulted [A laugh]. Gentlemen might laugh; but that laugh proceeded in some degree from want of reading, for it was at variance with the opinion of every author who ever wrote upon political economy. The hon. member concluded by moving, as an amendment, that the committee be chosen by ballot.
Sir M. W. Ridley
thought it extremely fortunate that no one had seconded the hon. general's amendment. He certainly regretted the decision which the House had come to on the preceding evening; but he trusted that the House would now take a course which should completely dissipate the alarm which, in certain quarters, that decision had excited. The country had little to fear from the committee, as proposed by the hon. member for Surrey: the members for Liverpool, London, and Bristol, afforded sufficient
713
Mr. Baring
was free to declare it to be his opinion, that if the House evinced any disposition to follow the course indicated by the gentleman who had moved and supported the motion, there would be ample ground for alarm, and he, for one, would be ready to pull the tocsin with all his might. If the House was determined to take such measures, the country could not take the alarm too generally nor too immediately. He trusted that he should not be misunderstood, and that no one would suppose that he could wish to favour the promotion of irritation, or hold that such measures ought to be opposed by tumult or commotion. Gentlemen who were members of that House at the time when the last Corn bill was passed, might remember that it was, at last, owing to such commotions that the bill was carried—[No, no!]. Certainty, whatever might be the opinion of gentlemen, the opposition of the House to that measure had rather been weakened than strengthened by the popular clamour. He was, however, of opinion, that if the House did propose to take the course to which he had alluded, the country could not too soon feel that alarm which should induce them to oppose it by constitutional measures. To use the language of one of the greatest and most eloquent men who ever sat in that House, "the alarm-bell at midnight, which disturbs our rest, may perhaps prevent us from being burnt in our beds."
Mr. Brougham
saw some little inconsistency in the feeling of the hon. member, who, while he deprecated alarm as one of the worst effects likely to be produced by the appointment of the committee, proposed to be the first who should pull,
714
Mr. Baring,
in explanation, said, he wished to avoid giving any unnecessary alarm; but the great evil was, that the alarm might, as in this case, be so well founded, as to show that the thing which created it was prejudicial to the best interests of the country.
The Speaker then put the question, that Mr. Bright, sir Thomas Ackland, Mr. John Fane, Mr. Bankes, Mr. Brougham, Mr. J. Benett, Mr. Irving, Mr. Coke, Mr. Gooch, and Mr. Frank-land Lewis, be members of this committee, which was carried.
Mr. Robinson,
without renewing the discussion which had taken place upon the preceding evening, would simply explain to the House why he now took a course which he had not then adopted. He objected to the principle upon which the motion of the hon. member for Surrey had been brought forward. Those particular circumstances as to which, in his opinion, inquiry might have been beneficial, did not, he thought, afford ground for the appointment of a committee; and therefore, although he should not have objected to an amendment, he did not propose one. An hon. friend of his had proposed an amendment, and the House had only been prevented from coming to a decision upon it by a point of form: it appeared that the hon. member who moved the previous question could not withdraw it without the unanimous consent of the House. He thought it his duty, however, since the House had determined that inquiry should take place, to limit that inquiry within the narrowest possible bounds; at least, within those bounds which he believed could alone lead to any practical advantage. The right hon. member then moved, "That it be an instruction to the said committee, to confine their inquiry to the mode of ascertaining, returning, and calculating the average prices of corn in the twelve
715
Mr. Wodehouse
did not last night wish to obtrude himself on the House. He was most anxious, however, that measures should be taken to suppress that dreadful system of gambling to which the corn trade at present was so peculiarly liable. Serious disadvantage resulted from the difficulty which existed in getting fair returns of the inferior sorts of corn. His right hon. friend, the president of the board of trade, thought that much of this inconvenience might be remedied by the interference of magistrates; but he (Mr. Wodehouse) was persuaded that magistrates would, in such a situation, be exposed to considerable difficulties. He knew of no act giving magistrates a controlling power in this respect, except the 31st of king George 3rd. This gave the magistrates an opportunity of checking the average, if the inspector were incorrect by the official corn returns; but that was insufficient. An hon. gentleman who sat near him felt somewhat incredulous as to the frauds committed in the corn trade; and he had himself, at one time, been nearly as incredulous as that hon. gentleman; for, though he certainly believed that frauds were practised, yet he had, as certainly, no conception of their importance, and of their extent. He was far from intending to raise a hue and cry against any trade; but he had received information from a quarter which he could not doubt, although he was unwilling to disclose it, of a fraud which had been committed, doubtless unintentionally, by one of the very first houses in Hamburgh. One of the principal dealers at Hamburgh had shipped a considerable quantity of wheat to this country, of a very superior quality. From the peculiar quality of this grain, the shipper was desirous to see it after it was warehoused; but, on inquiring at the warehouse, he was told that he could not see it; it was gone. He (Mr. Wodehouse) did not know that his credulity might not have been imposed upon; but it was important that the public mind should be set at rest. There was considerable difficulty in procuring, under the existing regulations, correct returns of the quantity of corn grown in large districts. To show the uncertainty of any average prices, founded upon the general returns, he would mention a
716
l.
s.
l.
s.,
s.
Mr. Walter Burrell
remarked, that it was evidently the intention of his majesty's ministers to fritter away every power and important function of the committee. He was sorry to find that an inquiry into the distresses under which agriculturists laboured should be so strenuously opposed. On the subject of averages great abuse existed. The county of Sussex, for instance, sent its corn to the London market, and therefore the averages were taken from the latter place, where the increased charges were added, and not from the place where the corn was grown. It was high time to speak out. He was decidedly of opinion that the agriculturist must be supported, or else he could not pay his taxes. The landholder wished not for monopoly, but for justice; he wished to be enabled to pay the fundholder his dividends. It was most unfair to charge him with being the cause of those public burthens, which, in fact, were imposed by the expenditure and taxation of the country. Unaccustomed as he was to address the House, he should say no more, but conclude by moving, as an amendment, "That it be an instruction to the committee to inquire whether the present mode of taking the averages ascertains the actual market-prices of grain throughout the United Kingdom, or whether any other method may be better adapted to accomplish that purpose."
Mr. Stuart Worthy
admitted, that indeed it was high time to speak out when such doctrines as the House had just heard were gravely laid down. He then, for one, must fairly say, that the country was not at this moment in a situation to bear a higher price of corn. He admitted, with the supporters of this motion, that the agriculturists were entitled to every protection which could be consistently extended to them; but he was convinced, that of all classes they were suffering the least, and that their distress bore no pro-
717
Mr. Benelt,
of Wiltshire, denied that he had ever been an advocate for high prices, and said he looked on the appointment of the committee as one step to their permanent reduction. Could it be supposed, that if the whole land were thrown out of cultivation, and we depended on foreign supplies alone, that the price of corn would be low in this country? Surety not; and whatever therefore tended to the protection of our agriculture, and to preserve us from foreign dependence, must have a tendency to avert the evil of high and fluctuating prices. It had been shown, in Mr. Colquhoun's book, that, in those years when we were under the necessity of importing corn in the greatest quantities, we never received a supply from abroad more than sufficient for 39 days consumption in the year. A good deal had been said with regard to the high price of cattle during the last year; but the fact was, that about four years ago that pi ice was so low as very materially to check the propagation, and the present rise was but a reaction from the scarcity so produced. The great mischief of the corn laws, as now framed, was, that they kept alive a constant anxiety in the minds both of the farmers and merchants. He had not the honour of a seat in the House when the measure of 1815 was adopted, or he should have stated this objection, for at that time he clearly foresaw the evil to which he was adverting. He wished to see another system substituted, and a direct duty imposed on foreign corn, equivalent to the superior taxation which we had to support. It had been truly said by a great authority on subjects of political economy, that, were it not for our immense debt and taxation, no protection would be wanted; the land, as well as the manufactures, would then be able to maintain itself; but
718
Mr. Monck
thought it but just to recollect that the question related not only to the price at which the farmer could grow his corn, but to what the poor man could afford to pay for it. The great objection to the corn-laws was, that they affected the poor in a cruel and disproportionate manner. It appeared that we might now, if there was no restriction, import corn at 50
s.
s.
s.
l.
l.
719
Earl Temple
entertained a hope that, as the committee was appointed, its inquiries might be productive of advantage; but at the same time he took this occasion of stating, that he for one would resist any measure that might be introduced, the object of which was to add to the price to be paid by the labouring classes for their corn or bread. They ought to be cautious how they raised the provisions beyond the ability of the people to purchase. Had he been present on the preceding night, he should indeed have felt inclined to oppose the appointment of a committee on the subject. He was certainly not prepared to name any specific remedy for the distresses of the agriculturists; but he thought it clear that these were not times for tampering with the feelings of the community. They were not times for legislating on the price of an article necessary to the existence of all. He did not mean, however, to say, that he regretted the appointment of a committee, because he trusted some good might arise from it; and with this impression he should vote for the original motion.
Mr. Wilmot
thought it was paltering with the agriculturists to grant a committee, if there was not an intention to support remedial measures in their favour. It would have been better to oppose the appointment of a committee than to resist all practical measures which it might recommend. He could not conceive any thing more futile than to agree to a motion, and then set one's face against the objects proposed. On the Catholic question, for instance, a subject which was to be shortly submitted to them, if any member were to say that he supported going into a committee, but at the same time stated his determination to oppose every object of that committee, what could be more contradictory? His own belief
720
Mr. Bankes
apprehended, that the hon. gentleman who spoke last had assumedtoo much when he stated to the Housethat there was but one remedy for the distress under which the agriculturists laboured. He (Mr. Bankes) approached the subject with great hesitation and doubt, but not without hope that some benefit might result from inquiry—that some relief to the agricultural interest might be found practicable, without injury to any other. Unquestionably that interest was intimately blended with the commercial and manufacturing, and the last twenty years had furnished various examples that the difficulties of one were sure to extend themselves to all. As to what had been said with regard to this being a time for speaking out, he feared that more indiscretion than sound sense had been manifested
721
722
Lord Castlereagh
said, he was anxious to rise after his hon. friend. His hon. friend, by taking the narrow ground, had
723
724
725
s.;
s.,
s.
s.
s.
726
727
728
729
s.
s.
s.
730
Mr. Sumner
said, the noble lord had accused him of imprudence, because he brought forward this motion, when the times were in so ticklish a state, and the public mind was likely to be agitated by it. The noble lord appeared, however, to have forgotten the disturbed state of the agricultural mind, although he had considered the feelings by which all other parties were agitated. It was that agitation of mind which caused such a number of petitions to be laid on their table—petitions from that class of people who formed the great source of our wealth, and who were, therefore, the first in importance. He did not mean to speak invidiously of the other classes. He looked on agriculture, manufactures, and commerce, to be the first pillars of the state. But, considering agriculture as the
731
s.
s.
s.
s.
Mr. Calcraft
said, as the hon. gentleman who bad just sat down had thought fit to
732
s.
733
s.
s.,
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
734
735
Mr. Brougham
observed, that he was unwilling to intrude himself on the patience and attention of the House, when he knew that the natural desire of gentlemen was, to conclude this discussion as soon as possible. After having stated his opinion perhaps at too great length on the preceding night, on the general merits of this question, it would not be necessary for him to enter minutely into the subject on this occasion. But they were now placed in a most peculiar situation, in consequence of the conduct adopted by his majesty's ministers, and he was bound to state the grounds on which his vote should be given. He felt almost precluded from entering into the merits of the question, even if he had more to answer than was advanced this night, for how did they find themselves placed with regard to those proceedings? A notice was solemnly given—a proper length of time was allowed to elapse—an opportunity was afforded by the hon. mover, for all gentlemen to consider the subject so that they might speak their sentiments deliberately and fully. He brought forward his proposition, and, after a debate—by no means a short one, and not confined to one branch of the question, but in the course of which every branch connected with it was presented to the House—at the mature hour of between three and four in the morning the House felt itself ripe for a division; and on what point? The question was this—whether or not they should refer the petitions to a select committee, who were to report their opinions to that House? On what were they now to be instructed to report? On something different from the contents of the petitions; on something not contemplated by the petitioners; on something not to be found in any one of those petitions. He had read the petitions down to the 26th day of May, which was the last he had printed before him. The petitions were numerous; they were various in their views, and different in their plans; but the one thing omitted in them all was this question of averages, which it appeared was the only
736
737
"Apparent dirae facies, inimicaque Trojae
"Numina magna—"
738
739
740
Mr. Robinson
said, that of all the extraordinary instances of forgetfulness that he had ever witnessed was that displayed in the speech of the hon. and learned gentleman. He appealed to the House whether the hon. and learned gentleman had not expressed his regret last night that the forms of the House did not allow an amendment to be put, which was the same as the motion which he (.Mr. R.) had that night proposed. The amendment had been read by his hon. colleague, the member for Ripon, in the very terms in which the motion was now put, and it was stated distinctly by the hon. and learned gentleman, that he lamented that the motion of the hon. member for Coventry precluded that amendment from being put [No, no! from Mr. Brougham]. What then was it that the hon. and learned gentleman did regret? It was plain he wished the motion to be narrowed in some way; but if he thought fit to narrow it, were other members to be bound to do so precisely in the same manner as the hon. gentleman? With what fairness could the hon. and learned gentleman apply the word trick, for that, no doubt, was the word hinted at, to any such proposition? He hoped he should be incapable of any such miserable trick, as to attempt, by any indirect means, to get rid of what the House had decided upon.
Mr. Brougham
explained, that he had last night copied what he understood to be the substance of the amendment of the hon. member for Ripon (Mr. Gipps), and had given it to the hon. member for Sussex, to whom he appealed, whether such had not been his understanding at the time.
Mr. Gipps
said, that the amendment which he had last night moved, was, at the beginning, in words the same as the motion made by the president of the board of trade that evening; in the latter part the motion was more limited than his amendment had been. The support of the hon. and learned gentleman had encouraged him to offer his amendment,
741
Mr. W. Burrell
confirmed the statement of Mr. Brougham.
Mr. Huskisson
said, he could retort on the hon. and learned gentleman the charge he had made on others of neglecting the debate; for he contended, that the amendment proposed, but not put, last night, and the motion now before the House, were in substance the same. It was quite usual for the House to restrict committees by instructions.
Mr. Brougham
explained, that he had consented last night that some limitation should be made to the motion. What he understood that limitation to be, he had stated to the hon. member for Sussex, by whom it had been put as the amendment now before the House.
Mr. Tierney
stated, that as he intended to vote for the proposition of the right hon. gentleman, and as his learned friend had imputed to that right hon. gentleman an attempt to play off a trick on the House, he was anxious to exculpate himself from being party to any trick, or from voting for the proposition on any such grounds. He could not but consider the debate of tonight as a continuation of that of the night before, and that the proposition now made had only not been made on the preceding evening, because the debate had been prolonged to too late an hour. He indeed understood the question of adjournment to be moved entirely with a view of giving an opportunity for the introduction of this proposition, which the forms of the House had then excluded from discussion. He was ready to admit, that if this proposition had been deferred until after the committee had sat some time, it would be open to the objections which had been made to it by his learned friend; but having been brought forward as a part of the preceding debate, as the condition under which the committee had been acceded to, he saw nothing in the course now pursued that was not consistent with the usual and fair parliamentary practice. With respect to the interests of the agriculturists, he could only say, that he had never heard of that degree of distress which had been pleaded in their behalf—that he had not heard of rents unpaid, or executions, or other symptoms of distress in an aggravated degree, nor did he believe them to exist. His great motive,
742
The question being put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the question," the House divided: Ayes, 251; Noes, 108. The main question was then put and agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, June 1, 1820.
SMALL DEBTS RECOVERY BILL.]
Lord Redesdale
rose to introduce a bill for the recovery of small debts. In the last parliament a great number of petitions had been presented on this subject, and it was generally expected that some measure would be founded upon them. This expectation, he thought, ought to be realized as soon as possible. A good many years ago it had occurred to him to introduce a bill for the purpose of facilitating the recovery of small debts; but, from certain circumstances, no progress was then made in the measure. In framing the bill he was about to submit to their lordships, he had considered it advantageous that the persons performing the duties of judges and juries should not be confounded; that the juries should be of a limited number; and that the process of recovery should be plain and simple, and accompanied with as little expense as possible. The sum recoverable at present in the county courts did not exceed 40
s.,
743
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
§
744
The bill was read a first time.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, June 1, 1820.
MANUFACTURING DISTRESS—PETITION FROM PAISLEY.
Mr. Maxwell
rose to present a petition from the distressed mechanics of the town of Paisley, who prayed the House to afford them the means of emigration to one of the colonies. The petitioners preferred Canada. One observation suggested by the petitioners was well worthy of the attention of the House. They deprecated poor-rates as degrading to themselves, and an evil to their country. It was manifest that what was given to support the poor, who had no employment was taken from the capital of the country. If they were not employed, they consumed without re-producing, and were thus useless in the community. They increased, therefore, the proportion of population beyond the proportion of produce. He was sorry that his majesty's ministers had not applied to that House for means of giving effectual support to emigration. The distress of the petitioners, like that of many others, was not owing to variations of the market, but to the annihilation of their trade. When England had been the only country which afforded security for the employment of capital, and when the decrees of Milan and the orders in council had put an end to all neutral commerce, the natural consequence had been, that those who felt no security for capital, and found no scope for their industry and skill elsewhere, should come to this country, and employ here their capital and their skill; but when this state of things was entirely changed, those who had come to this country became unprovided for. They, therefore, set up or revived manufactures in their own country. When he heard particular cases of distress urged upon the attention of the House; when he heard the distresses of agriculturists discussed, as they had been last night, he thought some alleviation might be provided. But it was impossible to give
745
COURT OF JUDICATURE IN WALES.]
Mr. Frederick Campbell
rose, in pursuance of the notice which he had given of a motion relative to the situation of the Welsh Judges, and the regulation of the court of judicature in Wales. The subject, in his opinion, deserved the most serious consideration of the House, as it was an attempt to remedy some of the defects, as he must term them, of the court of judicature in Wales. The remedy which he should propose for those defects was not founded on any newfangled theory, but on the opinions of men who could only desire change, because in their consciences they believed change to be necessary. Indeed, one of them, lord Colchester, whilst practising as a barrister on the Chester circuit, had pointed out
746
747
concedit solvere,
capias
748
certiorari
749
750
751
Mr. Warren,
chief justice of Chester, said, that in the violent tirade which the hon. gentleman had just delivered against Welsh judges, he had made no exception. Welsh judges in times past and time present, were equally denounced, and even Welsh judges in time to come were to be affected by the contagion of their example. With respect to those observations which applied to himself—
Mr. F. Campbell
denied having made any personal observations.
Mr. Warren
resumed. The hon. gentleman had certainly said that all were obscure and all were ignorant. The hon. gentleman, living in the part of the country in which he did, could not but know that there were persons who filled situations of as high honour and integrity, and as much professional knowledge as ever presided over any court of justice. One of them was a friend of the hon. gentleman, a most esteemed friend of the late Mr. Fox, and appointed by Mr. Fox to the situation. Nothing but the desire of sinking Welsh judges to the lowest abyss of infamy, could have induced the hon. gentleman to assert, not only that all who now existed, but that all who ever had existed, were corrupt. Did the hon. gentleman ever hear of sir William Grant? He thought not. Of lord Kenyon, of lord Redesdale, of sir Vicary Gibbs, of the present lord chief justice of the Common Pleas? He thought not. If the hon. gentleman had recollected that all these distinguished persons had, at one period of their lives, presided over the courts of Wales, he would scarcely have passed such a sweeping censure upon all Welsh judges. He did not know whether he was himself considered an obscure and ignorant person. Pie had once many friends on the opposite side of the House [Hear!]; and he hoped he still continued to retain their friendship, though he was aware that little dependence could be placed on the continuance of friendship where party considerations interfered. In looking round the House, he saw many gentlemen on both sides of the House who had done him the honour to employ him [Hear, hear!]. He would take that opportunity of alluding to some observations of a noble lord opposite, which he had seen in the public prints, and which evidently alluded to himself; they were in the same spirit as the tirade which had been just uttered by the hon. gentleman, and he begged to assure the noble lord
752
753
Mr. Creevey
declared, that he was not able to see upon what ground, while the English judges were excluded from seats in that House, the Welsh judges should be allowed to sit there. The object of the law which excluded the English judges obviously was, to preserve the bench from any taint of political or party bias, and with the same view those judges were rendered independent of the Crown. If, then, it was deemed proper to keep the judges from among those who were within the sphere of political action or influence, why should the Welsh judges be allowed to sit in that House? The conduct, indeed, of the learned gentleman himself, who had just sat down, furnished a strong argument, if any were wanted, to show that the judges should not be allowed to have seats in that House.—He had known his learned friend, if he would allow him now so to call him, for above twenty years, during which he could not say that he agreed with the learned gentleman in political opinion, as that learned gentleman went generally much farther than he could [Hear, hear!]. The learned gentleman, indeed, usually concurred with the hon. baronet, the member for Westminster, who was uniformly the subject of his most fervent panegyric. What, then, was the inference from the extraordinary change which had taken place
754
Lord John Russell
disclaimed the tirade attributed to him by the hon. and learned gentleman. He indeed recollected to have seen such a tirade ascribed to him, in what purported to be a report of his speech, in one of the newspapers usually devoted to the service of administration, namely, that the hon. and learned gentleman was always ready to support the unconstitutional measures of his majesty's ministers. What could induce the reporter to ascribe these words to him, or the learned gentleman to conclude that he uttered them, he could not pretend to say. But he certainly had never said any thing of the kind. What he really had said on the occasion alluded to was this, that the judgeship which the learned gentleman occupied was usually granted as a reward or retainer for the support of ministerial measures, while that judgeship was generally a step towards other offices, the holders of which were always the supporters of the minister of the day—that is, that the chief justice ship of Chester was usually a step towards the offices of either attorney or solicitor general, which was an observation fully justified by experience. It was well known that the act which rendered the English judges independent of the Crown had given universal satisfaction; and looking to the principle and purpose of that act, he was at a loss to imagine any defence that could be framed for placing the Welsh judges in a dif-
755
Mr. Wynn
regretted the personalities that had been indulged in. When the former report was made, the present chief justice of Chester was not a member of that House. The committee of 1817 did much; but in the absence of so many members, they did not give any positive opinion as to the Welsh judges. With respect to the motion, he felt some difficulty. His own opinion always was, that the abolition of the present system of Welsh judicature could not all at once be effected, or effected with immediate advantage. At the same time, he
756
Colonel Wood,
who had also been a member of that committee, said, that the opinion of Mr. Ponsonby, whose name would always be looked up to with respect, had at one time been strongly in favour of abolishing the Welsh system of judicature altogether; and it was but fair to state the manly and candid manner in which that lamented individual acted as chairman. He did distinctly understand Mr. Ponsonby's opinion to have been completely changed by the evidence laid before the committee, and that he thought, on examination into the subject, that the Welsh judicature: possessed many advantages, and should not be done away with altogether.—Among all the witnesses examined before; the committee, there was only one, a; Mr. Owen, who wished the system to be abolished. No question had been put to any of the witnesses, as to the propriety of these judges sitting in that House; nor was there any occasion for hearing evidence on that point before a committee, because it was a question on which the House was able to judge without any such inquiry. One ground of complaint had been, that in consequence of the ambulatory habits of the equity barristers who attended the circuits, the suitors in the courts of equity; in Wales could not sometimes get their causes heard for six months. This he I thought a less hardship than it had been represented; for he believed that many; of the suitors in the equity courts of England would be very well satisfied if they could obtain a hearing in six years. The hon. gentleman proceeded to state various arguments against; the abolition of the present system. One: reason for not including Wales in the circuits was, that many of the witnesses I could not speak a word of English. But
757
Mr. Wrottesley
thought it his duty as the evidence which had been brought before the committee which was formerly appointed by the House to inquire into this subject had been so frequently alluded to this night to say, that as much of it was procured as every member of the committee thought necessary. And it was but justice to say, that every possible I diligence was used by the late right hon. gentleman who was the chairman, to enable them to come to a proper and final determination upon the question submitted to them. It had been determined to meet, for the purpose of making a full report, when, in the mean time, that deplorable event which all the country sincerely regretted took place. Consequently the committee never did meet again; but it was thought necessary that a report of some kind should be agreed upon; and,
758
Mr. Chetwynd
thought what had passed in the House that night quite a sufficient reason for a change of system with regard to the Welsh judges. For to see a gentleman who wore the robe of a judge, standing in that House to plead and at liberty to decide in a cause in which he was personally interested, appeared to him a very great anomaly. He really thought that ministers would do well to give up the source of patronage which they possessed, from having Welsh judges sitting in that House. He had no doubt, indeed, that such a surrender would serve very considerably to advance the character of his majesty's ministers, and he was as anxious as any man that that character should stand high in public estimation. At an early period of the reign of Geo. 2nd, it was enacted that the Scotch baron should not be allowed to sit in that House, and the English judges were also excluded. The judges then both of England and Scotland being prohibited from sitting in that House, he could not see upon what ground the Welsh judges should be allowed to sit there. Another objection to the present system of the Welsh judges was, that they were allowed to practise as barristers in this part of the kingdom; and thus a suitor on the Chester circuit had an opportunity of ascertaining, perhaps of prepossessing the mind of the judge who was to try he cause. On these grounds he should support the motion.
Mr. Allen
said, that the hon. colonel, who was not, he believed, a Welshman, although he represented a Welsh county, had given a representation of the opinions of his constituents and neighbours upon this question very different from that which lie (Mr. Allen) should give of those entertained in that part of the country with which he was himself connected. With respect to the petition which had been presented recently from Carmarthen,
759
760
*
*
761
Lord Castlereagh
said, that the hon. gentleman who had just spoken had done no more than justice to his majesty's ministers in supposing that they neither had nor could have any other object, upon this question, than that that should be done which was best calculated to render justice to so large a class of his majesty's subjects. For himself he had no difficulty in saying, that he had come into that House under this general impression upon the subject—that it had already undergone, the most elaborate examination—that every possible inquiry had been made, and every possible evidence obtained from the most able and intelligent persons; and therefore he had conceived that all topics which could now be proposed to be submitted to a com-
762
763
764
765
Mr. Barham,
as a member of the committee to which this subject had been formerly referred, said, that the last time he asked his lamented friend Mr. Ponsonby, what he thought would be the result of the investigation, respecting the system of Welsh judicature, his answer was in the singular terms, "that he thought it would be the best way to get it into the great boat." He had heard his right hon. friend express the most decided opinion, that the system of the appointment of the Welsh judges was most corrupt. He used to say that it was generally a job. Certainly the hon. mover had never declared any thing so preposterous as that every Welsh judge who had been appointed was ignorant and corrupt. But he said that they were not appointed as the English judges were, on whose appointment no suspicion ever rested; as they were obviously selected for their character and learning. If he were asked if he had not heard of sir William Grant, and other eminent men who had been Welsh judges, he would reply, yes; but he would ask, in return, if his interrogator had never heard of a Welsh judge who was appointed after having relinquished his profession for ten years, and who was the clerk of the king's kitchen at the time; and whether he would lay his hand on his breast, and say that he did not believe the appointment of that individual grew out of some transactions in a borough in the county of Surrey? There had been several other Welsh Judges; among the rest two of the names of Lloyd and Popham, who were by no means fit for that situation. In proof of the evils arising from allowing any man to hold a judicial situation, who
766
Mr. Bathurst
defended the character of the Welsh judges from the imputations which he conceived had been unjustly thrown upon them. It was true that A or B might have received an opinion from one of those judges in his capacity of barrister, but was that judge to be taunted with having held a different opinion on a subsequent occasion on the bench? It was known that the great lord Mansfield had, when a barrister, held opinions which he had subsequently found it necessary to change. But surely that learned judge did not deserve to have this alteration of opinion held up as a reproach against him. He supported the amendment of his noble friend.
Mr. Barham
wished to take the earliest opportunity of rectifying a mistake into which he had unintentionally fallen. In speaking or Mr. Justice Lloyd, he had imputed to that gentleman certain matters which'he believed were chargeable not against him, but another individual.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that his early recollections impelled him to do justice to the Welsh bar and bench. Unless a great change had taken place in the judicature of that part of the country within the last twenty years, which he believed was not the case, both the bench and bar were entitled to the greatest respect. He recollected when he had the honour of practising at the Welsh bar that the bench was filled by men of the highest respectability and talent. Mr. Lloyd,
767
Mr. W. Parnell
had heard with the utmost pain the observations upon his learned friend the present chief justice of Chester. It was impossible for his learned friend to have accepted the situation from any base or unworthy motive; he took it probably from an honourable love of influence and power, that he might enjoy more extensive means of doing good, and contributing to the welfare of his country.
Mr. R. Martin
regretted extremely to have heard so many pointed allusions hurled at his hon. and learned friend, from the opposite side of the House, where his hon. and learned friend had long sat, although he was now transferred to his side. But he did not learn that he had belied any principle on one side, which he had professed on the other. He remembered an expression of the late Mr. Ponsonby, who had long been considered by the gentlemen opposite as a staunch patriot and an ornament to their ranks, an expression worthy of being recorded. It was, that a man who had been a patriot out of office, might be doubly a patriot in office; and he hoped that maxim would be repeated now with some advantage to the country, and be favourably received by the gentlemen opposite, and induce some of them to come over to his side, and display their patriotism with so much more advantage to their country. The imputation suggested against his hon. and learned friend, of delivering opinions as a judge different from those he had professed as a barrister, might with equal justice be applied to every judge on the bench. It was in the very nature of things, that a gentleman of the bar, feed to support one side of a cause, and bound to use his best exertions for his client, should urge arguments, and profess opinions which, as a judge, calmly viewing both sides of the case, he would not avow from the bench; and on
768
Mr. Denman,
in answer to the question put to him by the hon. member, hoped he should never have cause to be ashamed of any opinion he had ever delivered in that House, or elsewhere; nor did he fear that any opinion he had delivered or should deliver in that House or any where else would ever rise in judgment against him; nor should he desert those opinions in any situation in which he might be placed.
Mr. Scarlett
said, that the anecdote about the Welsh judge acting as counsel, and delivering an opinion in the one capacity which he reversed in the other, was certainly possible, and as such it was a good illustration of the inconvenience of uniting the two characters.
Mr. Campbell
addressed the House in reply. After some allusions to the salaries of Welsh judges, and to the opinion given by lord Bulkeley before the last committee, he observed, that he had no personal enmity to any of those gentlemen; on the contrary, he had the highest respect for many of them. There was one for instance, Mr. Heywood, for whom he had the highest esteem and friendship. There was no man more respectable in his profession—there was no man whose character was more strikingly contrasted with that of another individual spoken of that evening. He had accepted his situation without any compromise of principle; he had never held a seat in that House. He had no objection to accede to the amendment of the noble lord.
The amendment was then agreed to, and a committee appointed.
LABOURERS WAGES BILL.]
Mr. Littleton
now rose to bring forward his motion, for leave to bring in a bill, to amend the laws in existence, for obliging the persons who employ labourers and workmen to pay their wages in money, and not in goods or other equivalents. The hon. member shortly explained the object of his intended bill; namely, to
769
770
Sir J. Mackintosh
would not object to the introduction of the bill, though he thought the hon. gentleman would effect a more beneficial object by moving for a repeal of all former enactments that interfered between master and workmen. He was convinced that the best remedy for the evils complained of would be, to abolish all restrictions. He reserved to himself the right of opposing this bill in its future stages.
Mr. Robinson
entertained great doubts as to the beneficial tendency or good policy of legislative interference in the agreements between master and workmen. Restrictions of the kind now proposed had existed for a long time, and it might be a delicate question, whether they ought immediately to be abolished; but he had no difficulty in saying that if we had to begin again, he would not countenance such a policy. He would not oppose the introduction of the bill, but neither would he pledge himself to its future support.
Mr. Wrottesley
expressed his satisfaction that the attention of the eminent individuals who had just spoken had been called to the subject.
Colonel Wood
hoped that time would be allowed to spread the knowledge of the measure throughout the country before the bill passed into a law, as he had received notice from Wales that there would be petitions against it from those connected with the iron-works in that quarter.
Mr. Hume
said, the present law was evaded, but he would rather that the fifteen restrictive acts should be repealed, and a perfect freedom of making agreements allowed between master and workman, than that new enactments should be made which would likewise be evaded. He strongly objected to the continuance of the combination laws, the repeal of which would go far to satisfy the bulk of the labouring poor.
Mr. Baring
regretted that such a motion should have been made. He was aware of the good intentions of the hon. mover, but he thought the question of such importance, that a committee ought to be appointed upon it. He hoped the hon. mover would see the propriety of altering his motion to that effect.
Mr. Littleton
could not help feeling some doubt on the subject, after the opi-
771
Mr. W. Smith
agreed with the general principle of leaving trade free, although the practice was against that doctrine. He thought a motion for a committee would have been better; because, if the allegations were proved, that would support the necessity for the bill. If not, there would have been good grounds for repealing the acts altogether. At any rate, he could not agree to a denial of a consideration of the subject.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
LINEN BOUNTIES.]
Mr. Maberly
rose, pursuant to notice, to bring under the consideration of the House the propriety of continuing the Bounties on the Exportation of British and Irish Linens, and with this view, he moved, that the 29 Geo. 2nd, c. 15, the 3 Geo. 3rd, c. 12, the 23 Geo. 3rd. c. 14, the 46 Geo. 3rd, c. 29, and the 51 Geo. 3rd, c. 14, be read. The said acts being accordingly entered as read, the hon. member moved,—"That this House will to-morrow resolve itself into a committee of the whole House, to consider of the said acts."
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
was of opinion that it would be better if this question were brought forward by some member of the executive government, but, at all events, it was not necessary to introduce it now, because the acts providing for those bounties would not expire till next year. The intermediate period would allow the executive government to determine whether they would or would not continue them. He was anxious that the different parts of the United Kingdom should be placed as nearly as possible on the same level with respect to trade, but he was the more ready to put off the consideration of this question, because he thought the whole subject of the encouragement of trade was likely at an early period to come under the consideration of parliament. He would therefore take the liberty of moving the previous question.
Mr. Maberly
expressed great surprise at the manner in which his motion had been treated. After he was given to un-
772
Mr. Robinson
expressed regret at any misunderstanding to which he unintentionally had given rise. He certainly stated, in answer to a noble lord opposite (Milton), that it was but just and expedient that the bounty enjoyed by the Irish manufacturer should be extended to the Scotch and the English, but he did not pledge himself to any continuance of the bounty. Scotland and England had the same right to bounty for the exportation, of linen as Ireland; but as the act would expire in 1821, none of the three kingdoms could claim its continuance beyond that time. He had, in fact, declined giving any assurance to the hon. gentleman on the subject till the period when the bounties should expire, which would be in March 1821. When the hon. gentleman stated his determination to bring it forward immediately, he had replied, that the hon. gentleman was master of his own-conduct, and would of course exercise his own discretion; but he was not surprised that his right hon. friend should deem the motion premature. He was no great authority on the construction of acts of parliament, but it was well understood, that when a law was passed for continuing a former law, its operation reverted to the period when the former law ceased to exist. He certainly had, upon communication with the parties, admitted that, in fairness and justice, they were entitled to the same advantage as the manufacturers of Ireland. Although he thought the mo-
773
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
expressed his regret at having misconceived the understanding which it now appeared had been come to between the hon. gentleman and his right hon. friend. With the permission of the House, he would withdraw, under these circumstances, his motion for the previous question.
Mr. Maberly
observed, that nothing could be more distinct than the communication which had passed between Mr. Robinson and himself. He had shown to the right hon. gentleman the paper, which he intended to submit to the committee, nor had the slightest intention of apposing the bill which he was desirous of introducing, been signified. Pie thought himself therefore warranted in the observations which he had made, and he hoped he should not be excluded from resuming those observations as far as they related to the act of union.
The Speaker
reminded the hon. gentleman that the question originally was, that certain acts be entered as read, and that the House do resolve itself into a committee on the following day, to consider of them. Upon this the chancellor of the exchequer had moved the previous question; but, after an explanation of something which had passed between the hon. mover and a right hon. gentleman permission had been asked of the House to withdraw it. The only question now was, that the House should resolve itself into a committee of the whole House to-morrow, to take the subject into consideration.
The question on this motion was then put and agreed to. Mr. Maberly then moved, "that it be an instruction to the said committee to consider of charging a duty on the importation of foreign linen yarn."
Lord Milton
apprehended that the House would be travelling rather too fast in immediately assenting to this new proposition without any discussion. It seemed to him that it would be early enough to bring forward this question on the following day.
Mr. Robinson
thought it would be an extraordinary proceeding to send such an instruction as this to a committee of the whole House. It was the addition of a matter that had no connexion with the subject into which the committee was appointed to inquire. The first object that
774
Mr. Tierney
was of opinion that his hon. friend had adopted the proper course, and made his motion at the right time. It was not to pass without discussion, but the discussion would regularly take place when the committee should be appointed.
Mr. Bankes,
conceived that the terms of the instruction being in some degree imperative, brought the whole question now before the House.
Sir John Newport
remarked, that the subject matter of the instruction was. altogether extraneous to the question which the committee would have to consider.
The Speaker
said, that, without reference to the arguments adduced on either side, it must be the wish of the House that its forms should be complied with. It was clear that, if the terms of the motion were imperative, it was no instruction at all; and that it must be brought forward in another shape in the committee, and make part of its report with a view to a future bill. But in this case the instruction was not imperative, and the real difficulty which he felt, arose from a doubt whether it was competent to make such an instruction referring to matters which, without it, the committee could not consider on any day but that on which the committee was appointed. It was, however, substantially inconsistent with their forms to take any step, or express any opinion, prior to the time of discussion.
Mr. Maberly
declared himself quite willing to defer to the sense of the House, or the opinion of the Chair.
The question as to the instruction was then withdrawn.
ALIEN BILL.]
Lord Castlereagh
rose, pursuant to the notice he had given, to move for leave to bring in a Bill to continue the Alien act, and to abolish naturalization, arising from the purchase of stock in Scotland. The bill intended to continue the act for the same period during which it had been lately in force namely, two years. This was the fifth time which this question had been brought under the consideration of parliament.
775
776
777
778
779
780
Sir Robert Wilson
was aware that it was rather unusual to debate a question on the motion for leave to bringin a bill; but the present question was of such a nature as to justify him in coming forward thus early to resist its introduction, and he had the satisfaction to know that many members approved of the course
781
782
783
784
785
l.
s.
d.
Mr. C. B. Wall
said, that in the year 1715 aliens were protected by a commercial treaty. It had been observed, that there had been no abuse of the powers conferred by this measure, and it
786
787
The Solicitor General
said, he should rot have risen upon the present occasion were ft not for some observations that had fallen from the gallant general, and the statement made by him with respect to the abuse of the law. Had it been abused, as the gallant general said, there would certainly be a strong ground for opposing the motion; but the charges brought forward had not the slightest foundation in truth. With respect to the case of general Gourgaud, it was, on a former occasion, brought before the House in the shape of a petition. All the statements now made by the gallant officer were then advanced, and they were every one contradicted. No answer was given to that contradiction. If the charges could have been made out, it was the duty of those who brought them forward to appoint a day for taking the allegations of the petition into consideration. That not being done, was sufficient evidence that those allegations could not be supported by proof. The gallant officer himself, took great pains to ascertain the truth. He wrote to a person at Harwich, and put various questions a3 to the treatment of general Gourgaud. These questions were all answered, but the answers were never brought under the consideration of the House. General Gourgaud was allowed to go before a magistrate at Harwich. Gentlemen were permitted to visit him while there; and if he had any ground for complaint, he had full opportunity of proving it.—It was not true that he paid the expenses of the officers who attended him: he paid his own expenses, but he insisted on doing so; and he had instituted no complaint of improper conduct on the part of the officers. Yet, when the case was before the House, the gallant general had not had the candour to state what he had done, or what had resulted from his inquiries. Had the charges in the petition been brought forward, they could have been most triumphantly refuted. He would undertake to say, that every statement in the petition was a falsehood. When Mr. Capper, with his assistants, entered the general's lodgings, and was proceeding to the performance of his duty with propriety, he perceived him endeavouring, to get hold of a case of pitols on his chimney-piece. Some force then became necessary. He insisted upon having his papers. They were given to him, and he put his seal on
788
789
790
Sir James Mackintosh
said, that at so late an hour of the night, and so much exhausted as he felt himself, he should have been unwilling to say any thing on a subject on which at former times, and at great length, he had felt it necessary to trespass on the indulgence of the House, had not his opinion been specially called for by his hon. and learned friend in a manner for which he was certainly very grateful. As that had been done, he should now on the first stage trouble the House with a few words on a measure, to every stage of which he should offer his most decided opposition, reserving for a future occasion a more detailed statement of his reasons. In making these observations it was not his intention to enter into a controversy as, to particular facts, arising from the. cases which had been mentioned by his gallant friend; in the first place, because he was not acquainted-with the circumstances of those cases, and must, therefore, leave
791
792
i
793
794
795
796
Mr. Lambton
did not intend to occupy much of the time of the House. He only rose for the purpose of remarking on some observations which had fallen from the hon. and learned solicitor-general. He did not remember whether that hon. and learned gentleman was in the House at the period of his (Mr. Lambton's) presenting a petition to which he had alluded. If he were he must have grossly misunderstood what he had said on the occasion; or if he had not, he must have received a most erroneous account of what had occurred. At the time when he presented the petition from general Gourgaud, in 1818, he had asked the noble lord to consent to a committee, in which he would pledge himself to bring proof of the facts stated. The noble lord refused that committee; and he (Mr. Lambton) did not attempt to bring the matter again forward, because he knew it would be of no avail without the committee, and, aware of the manner in which the House was constituted, he well knew that it was hopeless to expect that when the noble lord had refused his consent. As to the statements now made, they rested on the credit of the petition, or on that of the hon. and learned gentlemen—which of them the House might believe, he would not pretend to say, but he thought the one entitled to as much respect as the other. The hon. and learned gentleman had stated, that general Gourgaud had seized his pistols when the officers approached to arrest him;—that might be true—but was it not natural for a man of his rank, to attempt to defend himself when he had been so intruded upon by strangers? It was also true that the general was allowed to seal his paper—but it was likewise a fact, which had been ascertained on the authority of the consul at Hamburgh, that that seal had been broken, and the portfolio returned the general opened. As to the questions of which the hon. and learned gentleman had
797
The Solicitor General
begged leave to say, that Mr. Capper apprized general Gourgaud of the nature of his business before he arrested him.
Lord Castlereagh,
in reply, said, that he did not recollect the case with the government of the Netherlands to which the hon. member for Durham alluded. When Las Casas was sent out of this country, it was not with any view that he was to be taken into custody on his arrival in the Netherlands. As to the Holy Alliance, he denied that this country was a party to it in any diplomatic sense of the word. There was no understanding connected with it by which we were to send obnoxious foreigners out of the country. On the contrary, he thought that other countries had a right to complain of the indulgence shown to foreigners, considering the powers which this law placed in our hands. He never heard any government complain of the act, or adopt any measures hostile to the passages of Englishmen through their kingdom in consequence of it. Cer-
798
Mr. Lambton
stated, that he had, in 1818, moved for the papers respecting an alien sent out of the country at the request of the government of the Netherlands.
The House divided: Ayes, 149; Noes, 63.
List of the Minority.
Althorp, viscount
Maberly, John.
Baring, Alex.
Maberly,W. L.
Barnard, viscount
Mackintosh, sir J.
Barrett, S. M.
Milton, viscount
Beaumont, T. W.
Monck, J. B.
Becher, W. W.
Newport, sir J.
Baillie, colonel
Osborne, lord F.
Calcraft, John
Ossulston, lord
Caulfield, hon. H.
O'Grady, S.
Creevey, Thomas
Palmer, C. F.
Clifton, viscount
Pares, Thos.
Colburne, N.R.
Parnell, Wm.
Denison, Wm.
Philips, George
Denman, Thos.
Price, Rt.
Dundas, Thos.
Ramsden, J. C.
Duncannon, vise.
Ricardo, David
Ebrington, viscount
Robinson, sir G.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Robarts, George
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Russell, lord John
Fitzroy, lord C.
Scarlett, James
Folkestone, visce
Scott, John
Graham, J. R. G.
Sefton, earl of
Graham, Sandford
Smith Robert
Harbord, hon. E.
Stuart, lord J.
Heron, sir R.
Sykes, D.
Hughes, W, L.
Spurrier, C.
Hughes, col.
Tierney, G.
Hume, J.
Wall, T. B.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Ward, hon. J.W.
Jervoise, G. P.
TELLERS.
Lamb hon. W.
Lambton, J. G.
Lloyd, sir Ed.
Wilson, sir Robt.
Lushington, Dr.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, June 2, 1820.
FAILURE OF BANKS IN THE SOUTH OF IRELAND.]
The Marquis of Lansdowne
wished to ask the noble lord opposite whether his majesty's government had
799
l.,
The Earl of Liverpool
was in some measure apprized of the unfortunate circumstances to which the noble marquis had alluded, but he had as yet received no official communication on the subject. He was, therefore, not prepared to say what it might be thought advisable to do, or whether his majesty's government would think fit to interfere in the case.
The Earl of Lauderdale
expressed his regret at the distress to which the question of his noble friend referred, but was at the same time of opinion, that no precedent more fatal in political economy could be set than that of the interference of government in the credit of the country by holding out assistance to individuals. The Bank of England had, in cases of commercial distress, sometimes interfered, because it was its interest to support commercial credit, as far as support could with propriety be given by that establishment. Let the Bank of Ireland therefore imitate the conduct of the Bank of England, and act in the business on commercial principles.
The Marquis of Lansdowne
assured his noble friend that he was far from calling for the direct interference of his majesty's government. All that he meant to suggest was, that in case the Bank of Ireland should be desirous to do that which its own interest dictated, namely, to supply the vacuum in the circulation occasioned by the failures to which he had alluded, government would not withhold such assistance as might be necessary to facilitate the operations of the Bank. The necessity of the case was great, as at present, where the failures had taken place, there
800
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, June 2, 1820.
TIMBER DUTIES.]
General Gascoyne
presented a petition from some merchants, ship-owners, and otheiss, in Liverpool. The prayer of the petition might appear somewhat inconsistent, as it favoured a relaxation of the Navigation laws, and yet opposed any alteration of the acts respecting foreign timber. They expressed themselves much interested in not narrowing their trade with our North-American colonies. He should say no more at present upon the subject, reserving himself till a city member, who had given notice of a motion connected with this question, should bring the subject fully under discussion.
Sir Isaac Coffin
observed, that the statement of the petitioners was quite incorrect. Instead of the timber, as they alleged, being colonial, and which was imported into this country from Quebec, the fact was, that such timber was the growth of the north-west part of the province of New York. He had himself written to lord Bathurst on the subject, for such was the effect of that trade between our American colonies and the United States, that in the last war our colonies were wholly drained of silver. The sooner a duty was put on the importation of that timber the better. We had, by the preference given to that trade, lost a good customer in Russia and the other Northern States.
General Gascoyne
said, that as far as the knowledge of his constituents went, they believed the timber imported from the British American Colonies to be their growth. It was also to be recollected, that the return sent from this country in payment of that timber was in salt, to the amount of 40,000 tons.
Ordered to lie on the table.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.]
This Bill was committed, and considerable discussion arose respecting the
ex post facto
801
Dr. Phillimore
cited several cases of infinite hardship occasioned by nullity of marriage in consequence of minority.
Mr. Wrottesley
moved an amendment to the effect, that parties so circumstanced should have six months after the passing of the bill within which suits might be commenced though both parties had attained majority.
Mr. Bennet
proposed a clause which had been suggested last year, but not adopted, to deprive persons of full age I who should marry minors, of the power of annulling such marriages by suits instituted by themselves, at any time or under any circumstances On the ground of minority. The licences were in most cases' obtained by the wilful perjury of the adults, and it was therefore highly improper that they should be at liberty to | derive a double advantage from such perjury, first, that of accomplishing the marriage, and next, that of avoiding it.
Sir John Nicholl
opposed the clause as contrary to the principle of the Marriage act, which rendered inoperative marriages so contracted, with respect to all the parties. This proposal had, it seemed, been rejected last year, and he thought correctly.
Mr. Tennyson
said, that although it was not without becoming hesitation that he differed from the right hon. and learned judge upon such a subject yet as he thought that the purport of the clause had been misunderstood, he did not despair of satisfying him of its propriety. In the first place, it had not been before rejected, as the right hon. gentleman supposed, for he (Mr. T.) was the individual who bad then brought it forward, and had merely withdrawn it at the instance of the hon. and learned member who introduced the bill, lest, though he knew not why, it should not be acceptable in another place. Next, he thought, that so far from being at variance with the principle of the Marriage act, it was precisely correspondent to that principle, which was a principle of protection to minors against indiscreet connexions. It was amply sufficient for this object to enable the minor to avoid the marriage, without leaving the adult at
802
Sir John Nicholl
said, that he certainly had misunderstood the purport of the clause, but now comprehending its object distinctly, he entirely acquiesced in its propriety.
Dr. Lushington
observed, that the clause required some alteration, and it was in consequence ultimately postponed, in order to be introduced in a subsequent stage of the bill.—The House then resumed, and the report was ordered to be received on Thursday.
PROTECTING DUTIES—IRELAND.]
Mr. Curwen,
on presenting a petition from the woollen cloth manufacturers of Keswick, took occasion to remark upon the state of their trade, observing, that the petitioners deprecated the intention, which they understood existed, of continuing what were called the protecting duties upon Irish linen.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
was averse to protecting duties, and would oppose their imposition, if they were now about to be laid on; but he thought that the manufactures of Ireland ought to meet with encouragement as well as those of England. He wished his right hon. friend would state what course it was his intention to adopt, for that would serve to remove from the minds of the manufacturers in Ireland that suspense, which was highly unfavourable to them.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that the subject was at present undergoing a special inquiry; but he had no hesitation to state, that it was not in his contemplation to propose the immediate repeal of the duties alluded to. Those duties had existed since the Union
803
Mr. W. Parnell
thought a system of protecting duties inconsistent with the sound principles of political economy, as hey could only be meant to force a manufacture. The duties alluded to had, however, existed in Ireland for 20 years, and if that period were not sufficient to afford the Irish manufacturers an opportunity of preparing for their repeal, what assurance was there that their further continuance, or that any proposed principle if gradual reduction, would have the effect which the right hon. gentleman professed to have in view?
Mr. Ricardo
observed, that it seemed to be admitted on all sides, that these protecting duties ought to be repealed. They had existed for 20 years, which surely was a period quite long enough to give the Irish manufacturers an opportunity of preparing for their repeal, if any such opportunity were necessary; and he really could see no reason for their further continuance.
Lord Castlereagh
said, that the proposition of a gradual repeal of these duties was deemed necessary, to afford time to the parties immediately interested, to prepare for their ultimate and complete repeal, which it was in the contemplation of his majesty's ministers to propose.
Mr. Hutchinson
expressed his concurrence in sentiment with the hon. member for Portarlington, as to the principle of protecting duties; and if the duties under consideration were now for the first time proposed, he apprehended that few would be found to support the proposition. But from local knowledge, as well as from general information, he was enabled to say, that the immediate repeal of those duties would be productive of the worst effects in Ireland. It was therefore wise on the part of ministers to determine upon some further continuance of that degree of protection to the trade of Ireland which these duties afforded, as that trade was known to stand so much in need of encouragement. It was very desirable that those engaged in this trade in Ireland, should not be kept much longer in suspense as to the intention of the chancellor of the exchequer; for as the duties alluded to were not long to continue ac-
804
Ordered to lie on the table.
ARMY ESTIMATES.]
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, to which the Army Estimates were referred,
Lord Palmerston
rose to move the Army Estimates. In proposing those estimates to the committee, he did not feel it necessary to go through an explanation of each particular item: he would confine himself chiefly to those in which there was any material variation from the charge of last year. The committee would perceive that there was this year an increase of force, amounting, including officers, to 11,745 men, making an increase of 220,000
l.
l.,
l.
l.;
l.
l.
s.
l.
s.
l.;
l.;
l.,
805
ORDNANCE ESTIMATES.]
Mr. R. Ward
rose, in consequence of the indisposition of his noble friend, to move the Ordnance Estimates. The right hon. gentleman began by stating, that although many persons were of opinion that our military establishment was too large, he was persuaded that it was not greater than the circumstances of the country demanded; The increase of expenditure in the department with which he was connected, amounted on the whole to 133,000
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.,
806
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.
s.
d.
Mr. Hume
thought that, in calling the attention of the committee to the amount of these estimates, he should save the time of the committee, if, instead of entering into minute particulars, he looked at the total amount under each head. The object of the committee should be, to see what was the total expense of the ordnance service for this year, compared with that for the last; and whether the circumstances of the country were such as to warrant the present amount. With this view he should take the simple method of showing the difference between the estimates of the last and the present years, rather than follow the
807
l.;
l.;
l.
l.;
l.,
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
l.:
l.,
l.:
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.;
808
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
809
l.
l.
l.,
l.;
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.;
810
Mr. R. Ward
said, that the hon. gentleman in the course of his remarks had not pointed out a single place or establishment which he thought should be suppressed. He called on the hon. gentleman to name one that could be dispensed with; though he did not pledge himself that those who had the charge of this department of the public service would accede to the recommendation of the hon. gentleman, because he conceived that from their experience they were best able to judge what establishments were necessary. He thought, however, that he had already stated sufficient proofs of the sincere desire which the noble individual at the head of the ordnance had to make every reduction for the sake of economy that was consistent with the efficiency of the establishment over which he presided. Those petty clerks on whose pensions the hon. gentleman had animadverted, were not he believed, known even by name to the noble duke, who had granted them pensions on the recommendation of those who were acquainted with the nature of their services and their claims. He was completely at issue with the hon. gentleman on the construction of the act of parliament which the hon. gentleman had erro-
811
l.,
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
812
l.,
l.
l,;
l.
l.:
813
l.
l.
l.;
l.
l.;
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.;
l.,
l.
l.;
l.,
814
l.;
l.
l.
l.;
l.
l.;
l.,
l.;
l.,
l.
l.
815
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
816
l.
l.
Mr. Creevey
said, an extraordinary answer had been made to an objection which he felt an interest in, as it was similar to one which he was about to make. When it was objected that a sum should not be voted for Gibraltar because there were other means of supplying that expense than by a vote of parliament, it was answered, that it should be made the subject of a separate motion, and this too in a committee of supply [Hear, hear!]. Now, he would not consent on the part of the people of England to pay for the repairs of forts at Barbadoes and the Leeward Islands. He would produce an act of the assembly of Barbadoes which provided for that express purpose without burthening the people of England. The hon. member then read the Act of the Assembly of Barbadoes of 1663, declaring that it was necessary for several purposes relating to the government of those colonies, and specially for "the reparation of the forts," that a competent revenue should be raised, and that for those purposes they granted a duty of 4½ per cent to be levied on all imports [[Hear!]. What, then, had they to do but to apply this revenue? He would prove that the revenue existed. There were papers before the House showing that the duties had produced 57,276
l.
l.
l.
817
l.
818
Mr. R. Ward
certainly did not mean to go into a discussion on the great question of the 4½ per cent duties, and their proper application: it was a question on which great difference of opinion existed; but it had recently been debated in both Houses of Parliament, and the majorities had declared themselves of the opinion which was now acted on by government. But in steering clear of discussion he said distinctly that the hon. gentleman had proceeded on
ex parte
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that the hon. gentleman had excited his astonishment and sorrow, and done himself very little credit by the manner in which he had treated one of the most liberal and public-spirited acts ever done in this or in any country—[Hear, hear!]. The lofty and generous conduct of the marquis, of which the hon. gentleman had spoken so lightly, had drawn forth the universal respect and gratitude of this country, and he believed of Europe. The hon. gentleman had taken on himself the credit of having compelled the noble marquis by the observations he had made in the House, to give up those official emolu-
819
Mr. Hume
referred to the reports of the finance committee to show that from 1715 to the year 1786 the 4½ per cent duties had been included in the revenue. It was not until the last-mentioned year, when the consolidated fund was established, that they were no longer comprehended in the general revenue, so that the right hon. gentleman's statement respecting them was perfectly unfounded.
Mr. Bennet
maintained, that in the original act of parliament imposing the 4½ per cent duties it was expressly stated that they were for assisting in the protection of the Leeward islands. Subsequently, in the reign of Charles 2nd, they were taken as a part of the hereditary
820
Lord Castlereagh
did think, and he was sure the feelings of the House and the country would go with him, that the mode in which the two honourable members had expressed themselves, in relation to the fees of the tellerships of the exchequer, was neither fair, candid, liberal, nor just. It would have been but justice to say, that this fund had lapsed into the hands of the noble marquis, who had exhibited such unexampled disinterestedness and public spirit in sacrificing his
821
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
repeated his assertion, that the noble marquis in question had made large sacrifices to the public interest long before the observations in parliament of the hon. gentleman opposite.
Lord Milton
observed, that there was one circumstance respecting the office held by the noble marquis, to which no allusion had been made either that night or previously. It was well known that a judicial office had been held by his father, which usually enabled its holder to amass a large fortune. That office he had resigned; and it should alwa3's be remembered what the cause of that resignation was. It had taken place because he believed it necessary to the defence of the rights and liberties of his country—believing that to save a compromise of his principles, he was obliged to separate himself from the administration then in power. It was upon the question of the Middlesex election, that, differing in opinion from his colleagues, he had thought he could no longer retain the chancellorship. The recollection of this fact should endear the memory of the father, and secure for his descendant the respect and attention of the country.
The several resolutions were then agreed to.
ARMY ESTIMATES.]
Lord Palmerston
again rose to bring forward the Army Estimates. He commenced by referring to particulars; and first to the staff, on which he said there was a total saving of 13,701
l.
822
l.;
l.,
l.,
l.
l.;
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.;
823
l.
l.;
l.,
s.
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.
l.;
l.,
824
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.
l.:
l.
l.
825
Lord Nugent
stated, that it was not his intention on the present occasion to go into all the objections which he entertained to the resolution now moved. One reason for his declining to do so was the evident indisposition of the noble lord. His objections, too, did not so much apply to the details embraced in the estimates now laid upon their table, as to the principle of maintaining so enormous a military establishment in time of peace. It was an establishment which he saw nothing to justify in the situation of Europe, or in our own domestic circumstances. The noble lord had not attempted to bring forward any argument to prove its necessity, but had rested its defence on the ground of public notoriety. Such a ground might appear satisfactory to the noble lord, but, in his opinion, a large military force was not a suitable remedy for popular discontent, arising from actual misery, and increased by the disastrous state of our finances. If complaints of taxation were to be met by enlarged establishments, it was obvious that we should move on in a circle till some final rupture took place between the Crown and the people, the issue of which must be either to confirm disaffection, or to establish a military government and a military police. Having made
826
l.
Mr. Fyshe Palmer
was anxious to draw the attention of the House to the subject of the driver corps, the skeleton of which was still kept up in Wales, but for what purpose of national utility he bad not been able to discover. He apprehended, likewise, that if the military college was still necessary, it ought to be placed on the most economical footing. He was far indeed from admitting that necessity, and was persuaded that one-half of what was laid out at Sandhurst would cover the entire expense of Marlow. It appeared to him that a most enormous sum had been expended in buildings, from which the public service could derive no adequate compensation.
Mr. Hume
considered that the House and the country were much indebted to an hon. and gallant officer (colonel Davies) who had recently called their attention to the subject of our military expenditure. It was undoubtedly a little singular to find, in the first place, so large an increase in the number of life-guards. That number, in the year 1792, was 695, and now amounted to 1,305. He was sure he was not exceeding the truth, when he estimated the cost of every individual in that corps, including horses and accoutrements, at 142
l.
l.
827
l.
l.
l.
l,
l.
l.
s.
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.
828
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
829
l.,
l.
s.
l.
l.
l.,
830
l.
l.,
l.,
Colonel Davies
regretted that those individuals who took an active part in the discussion of a corn bill, or a commercial or agricultural measure, did not seem inclined to devote their talents to the important subject now under consideration.
831
Lord Milton,
in reference to 11,000 discharged men that had been called out in the course of the last year, wished to know whether that was done without any vote of parliament. As far as he recollected, no vote had been agreed to on the subject. The number of the army on the 25th of March last exceeded, by 11,000 men, the number voted by the Mutiny bill in 1819. The number of men was stated annually in the preamble of the Mutiny bill, and these 11,000 men were arrayed when parliament was not sitting. No notice had been taken of this circumstance during the last session; at least no official notice. The noble lord might perhaps have mentioned it, incidentally, in his speech, but no vote of that House had taken place with reference to this subject. He could not conceive why it had been thus passed over.
Colonel Trench
was anxious to offer a few observations in defence of the establishment at Sandhurst. It was described as unfitted and unsuited for the purpose contemplated; observations were made on the extent of the fund appropriated to its support; and reflexions were also cast on the mode of education pursued in that
832
833
Mr. Bennet
said, the noble lord had stated that the Ophthalmic establishment cost the country about 2,000
l.
834
l.;
835
Mr. Goulburn
stated, that there was a militia set on foot in the Ionian islands, the drilling and superintending of whom had devolved on the staff. Whether they were so occupied at present he could not say. The hon. gentleman, in answer to the observation made by Mr. Hume, observed, that that there was a saving of upwards of 11,000
l.
Mr. Barham
said, his hon. friend had taken an erroneous view of the Ophthalmic establishment. He had got hold of a pamphlet, entitled "A Report submitted to the commander-in-chief on Ophthalmia;" and he seemed to conclude that it contained the judgment of a board of persons, to whom it was referred to decide on the disputes relative to this establishment. This was entirely a mistake: it was a private publication, printed by themselves, and was merely the reply of one party to the statement of the other. The hon. gentleman stated the number of pensions granted for diseases in the eye before the appointment of the Ophthalmic institution, and the number of persons pronounced incurable by army-surgeons cured at the Ophthalmic institution, in order to prove the utility of that institution.
Mr. Price
said, he had conversed with many persons who had relations in the hospital, all of whom concurred in speaking of it in terms of the highest praise. There were some who, after having been three or four years in other places under the army surgeons, and discharged at length as incurables, were restored to sight by sir William Adams.
Mr. Hutchinson
said, that the respectable individual at the head of the establishment now under consideration, had been hardly dealt with in many instances, and regretted that his hon. friend, the member for Shrewsbury, should have spoken as he had, under a misconception
836
837
Mr. Bennet
read an extract from the report of the three medical gentlemen appointed by the board, in which they stated, that the appearances were still more unfavourable than before. He did not mean to deny that sir W. Adams had performed great cures, but that they were not so numerous as to justify the continuance of the establishment.
l.
Lord Palmerston
replied, that there were no charges for infantry, and that it was the temporary and superseded character of the local militia which occasioned the expense now charged under that head. What were called skeleton waggons, were in perfect repair, and it would be against every principle of economy to sell or destroy them. The art of driving them was not to be acquired at once by a peasant or a ploughman. He thought Sandhurst preferable to Marlow for the situation of the military college. The commander-in-chief had had an increased allowance since 1814, but it was in lieu of other allowances previously given to field-marshals. The duke of Wellington got the same, the fluctuating allowances of field-marshals having been exchanged for a fixed sum. He then proceeded to defend the salary assigned to the judge-advocate, which he maintained was deserved by the services of that officer, who was in constant communication with the military commanders at Ceylon, the Cape, the Ionian islands, and also in Ireland, now that the office of judge advocate was abolished in that country. With respect to the observations which had been made on the Military College, they did not appear to him to be well founded; and really as to the calculations of the hon. gentleman regarding it, he confessed his inability to follow them. He maintained, that not more than a proper number of commissions had been granted to the cadets educated there, and those only upon a full conviction of the merit of those to
838
Lord Nugent
maintained, that the answer which the noble lord had just given to a question proposed to him by a nobles lord was by no means satisfactory. Those 11,000 veterans were certainly levied in a manner contrary both to the Bill of Rights and to the articles of the Mutiny act.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that he could never be brought to believe that there was any thing blameable in the transaction alluded to. The Crown had called those troops into existence, it was true, in October last; but no sooner had parliament assembled, than this fact was made known to it.
Lord Palmerston
maintained, that, according to the argument of the noble lord, the Crown could not, in any emergency, however great, levy a number of men without the consent of parliament. If this were the case, in what a dangerous situation would the country be placed, if a foreign foe were to land in the country during a dissolution of parliament!
Lord Nugent
was ready to admit, that
839
The resolution was agreed to; as were the votes of the various sums to meet the expenses of the army.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, June 5, 1820.
PETITION OF WILLIAM COBBETT RESPECTING THE CURRENT VALUE OF MONEY.]
Mr. Coke, of Norfolk, presented a Petition from William Cobbett, of Botley, in the county of Southampton, farmer, setting forth,
"That it is essential to the harmony, happiness, and safety of every civil community, that the law afford equal protection to all the members thereof, but that, owing to the imperfection inseparable from human institutions, cases will sometimes arise where not only the law, how well so ever intended, is inadequate to the giving of protection against wrong, but where the wrong proceeds directly from the law itself, and it is to such a case (a case to meet which the right of petitioning the legislature is peculiarly adapted) that the Petitioner now beseeches the attention of the House; that the Petitioner has suffered, and is still suffering, great and grievous hardship, and is in danger of suffering still greater and more grievous hardships, from the operation and effects of acts passed by the late parliaments, and particularly from an act passed on the 2nd of July, 1819, intituled, "An Act to provide for the gradual Resumption of Cash Payments by the Bank of England; "that in the year 1805, and in the eight immediately succeeding years, the Petitioner purchased and improved an estate, consisting of lands and tenements, in the county of Southampton, at the cost of 30,000
l.
l.;
840
s.
s.
841
l.
l.
s.
l.,
l.,
s.;
s.
l.,
l.,
s.;
842
843
Ordered to lie on the table.
REFORM OF PARLIAMENT—PETITION
844
FROM KINGSTON-UPON-HULL.]
Mr. Sykes
said, he held in his hand a petition signed by a number of persons of property and character, in favour of a limited alteration in the representation of that House. The petitioners were the freeholders of the county of the town of Kingston-upon-Hull. Its freeholders, amounting in number to between six and seven hundred, considerable also in property, were not allowed to vote in the election of knights of the shire for the county of York, nor of burgesses for the town of Hull. Though freeholders, they were wholly unrepresented, while at Bristol and Southampton, which were counties within themselves, the freeholders were allowed to vote for the representatives of those places. The present petition had arisen out of the discussion on the Grampound case, and the petitioners prayed, in the event of the transference of the right of return from Gram pound to the two ridings of the county of York, that they may be permitted to vote at such election. He entirely concurred in the views of the petitioners, and considered such a principle of reform both safe and practicable. He took that opportunity of giving notice of his intention, either to ask for leave to bring in a bill to that effect, or of moving a clause with such a purport, to be embodied into the Grampound Disfranchisement Bill.
Ordered to lie on the table.
PETITION FROM LIVERPOOL IN FAVOUR OF TIMBER DUTIES]
General Gascoyne
presented a petition, which he said was very respectably signed by the merchants and ship owners of the town of Liverpool. It was different from the petition which he had lately the honour of presenting to the House. It was founded upon a report which had gone abroad of an intended alteration of the duties on timber coming from the Baltic. It pointed out the advantages to be derived from a continuance of the timber-trade to our American colonies, which among its other benefits occasioned a consumption of British manufactures which could not be expected from the Baltic, if we should renew the timber-trade with that quarter by lowering the duties. Such decrease of the duties would, they observed, not only be extremely injurious to the shipowners, but to the seamen now employed, and to those emigrants who had gone out to the Canadas.
845
Sir Isaac Coffin
said, that fron his own knowledge he could assure the House that not a single emigrant in Canada was employed in cutting down the timber imported from America.
Ordered to lie on the table.
PETITION FROM THE SHIP-BUILDERS AND SHIP-OWNERS OF LONDON, IN FAVOUR OF TIMBER DUTIES.]
Mr. Marryat
presented a petition from the shipbuilders of the port of London, stating the distress under which they, and those dependent on them laboured. They were not enabled to give employment to the one-third of their former amount. It might be thought that they would be favourable to a remission of the duties on timber coming from the Baltic, as the timber would be cheaper; but they were not so. They had the good sense to see, that if that trade were opened, it must have the effect of destroying the trade with our North-American colonies, which they stated would be most injurious to our shipping trade. The petition, he observed, was signed by one of every respectable ship-building firm (with one exception) at both sides of the water, from one end of the river to the other.
Ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. Thomas Wilson
presented a similar petition from the ship-owners of the city of London. It was, he observed, most numerously and respectably signed. It was said, that the decrease of the duties on the Baltic timber was intended to conciliate the northern powers, and to increase our trade with them: but at a period like the present, with the enjoyment of the liberty of the press, and when our newspapers were circulated in all parts of Europs, those powers must see the situation in which this country was placed. They knew the amount of our national debt, and the deficiencies in our ways and means, and they could therefore have no reason to owe us a grudge for a duty on timber. It was not so offensive to them as the duty on foreign wool, which was imposed in the fifth year of peace. It was objected, that the relaxation of the duties on the Baltic timber would open a larger field for the exportation of our manufactures, but it should be recollected, that we obliged our colonies to deal with us exclusively, and they were enabled to do so, to a large extent, by means of this trade; but if we took our timber from the powers
846
Sir W. Curtis
said, that if ever there was a body of British subjects entitled to the consideration and respect of parliament, it was the present petitioners.—During all the difficulties of the war, they had been ready to make every sacrifice for the safety and honour of the country. He hoped that no interference would be made with those navigation laws which had so essentially led to our maritime greatness.
Mr. Marryat*
said: Mr. Speaker; I feel it my duty to bear testimony to the truth of the allegations contained in the petition now in the hands of my honourable friend the member for the city of London; and to give my best support to the prayer of the petitioners. They state that they are labouring under great and serious difficulties, as well from the depression of commerce, as from the competition of foreign ship owners; and the facts of the case unfortunately bear them out too well in the assertion; for no description of property has, I believe, been depreciated to j such an extent as that of the British ship owners. I admit, that on the breaking out of the late war, the value of shipping rose, the rate of freight advanced, and I that the ship owners, in common with the landholders, the manufacturers, and all other classes of the community, enjoyed for a time a considerable share of prosperity. Ships, however, are but of limited duration; they last from fifteen to twenty years, according to the goodness of the materials of which they are built. The
* From the original edition published by the committee of the society of ShipOwners.
847
l.
l.;
l.
848
l.,
l.,
l.
849
l.
l.
l.;
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.:
l.
l.;
l.
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
l.
s.
1.
s.
Obsta principiis
858
l.,
859
Pieces of timber from our American
52,412
Pieces of timber from the Baltic and Norway
58,994
Deals from the former
812,099
Deals to from the latter
1,622,440
Staves from our American colonies
1,236,095
Staves from foreign powers
1,897,902
From this comparison, the House may judge of the probable import into the other ports of the United Kingdom; and the conclusion to which it leads is, that nothing can be more unreasonable than the complaints of foreign powers of those existing duties, which place them at least on an equal footing with our own colonies. The complaint would come with more justice from the other parties that we do not give them that full protection in our home market, which, according to our colonial system, is the return to which they are entitled, for that double monopoly we impose upon them, of taking every thing from, and sending every thing to, the mother country, in British ships; thus making them marts for the consumption of her manufactures, and the foundation of her naval power. Even the most strenuous advocates for free trade, have applauded this system. Dr. Adam Smith, speaking of oar Navigation law, says, "It is not impossible that some of the regulations of this famous act may have proceeded from national animosity; they are as wise, however, as if they had all been dictated by the most deliberate wisdom." In a subsequent passage he observes, "The act of navigation is not favourable to foreign commerce, or to the growth of that opulence that can arise from it;" and, after explaining this point, he concludes thus:"As defence, however, is of much more importance than opulence, the act of navigation is, perhaps, the wisest of all the commercial regulations of England." This testimony is the more valuable, as; coming from the mouth of an unwilling witness, one of the greatest opposers of all commercial restrictions; who, however, acknowledges, that every other consideration ought to give way to the paramount object of maintaining our naval supremacy.
Some foreign writers of considerable eminence, have urged the same system that is now contended for by many of our own countrymen; the taking off all commercial retsrictions, and throwing trade entirely open. One of them, a man whose views of commercial and colonial policy are equally acute and profound, I mean
860
Dieu et man droil
861
The exertions of the mercantile petitioners to whom I have so often alluded, may be most usefully directed to the removal of those restrictions, by which British commerce is at present cramped and confined, and to the giving it all possible scope and expansion; but let them not interfere with those wise and salutary restrictions upon foreigners to which we owe the high rank we at present hold among the nations of Europe. I shall conclude, Sir, by recommending the following words of that enlightened statesman, lord Clarendon, to the serious consideration of his majesty's ministers. "They that shall be so honest and so wise, as duly to maintain the laws, thriftily and providently to administer the public treasure, and to preserve the sovereignty of the seas, that ancient true and best defence of these realms, that body, whomsoever it may be composed of, shall have the weight of England on its side; and if there can be any of any other frame, they must, in the end, prove miserable, rotten reeds." I have only to apologise to the House for having occupied so much of their time, and to thank them for the indulgence with which I have been heard.
Mr. Baring
said, that it was not intended on his part, or that of those with whom he concurred, to interfere with any part of our colonial policy, the timber trade alone excepted, and that nothing was farther from his purpose than to injure the interest of our shipping. There was, indeed, no class with whose interest he would be more unwilling to interfere, than that connected with our shipping. But when the whole question should be regularly brought before the House, after due and deliberate consideration by the committee for the appointment of which he proposed to move, without making any observation, after the present motion was disposed of, he would enter fully into the discussion of this subject.
The Speaker
suggested to the hon. member, who had just sat down, that, according to the arrangement of the business of the day, he could not regularly bring for-
862
Mr. M. A. Taylor
took occasion to animadvert upon the practice which had of late crept into that House, of raising a discussion upon mere motions for presenting petitions. The House had been now about an hour and a half engaged in discussing the merits of a petition which was not yet laid on the table, and upon which of course the House was as yet incompetent to decide. Such a course of proceeding was obviously so irregular, whilst it interfered so much with the ordinary business of the House, that he hoped gentlemen would feel the impropriety of persevering in the practice.
Ordered to lie on the table.
PORTSMOUTH ELECTION.]
Lord clive reported from the Select Committee appointed to try the merits of the Portsmouth Election,—"That the committee had determined, that it appeared to the said committee, that the merits of the petition did in part depend upon the right of election; and therefore the committee required the counsel on both sides to deliver to the clerk of the committee statements in writing of the right of election, for which they respectively contended: That, in consequence thereof, the counsel for the petitioner delivered in a statement as follows; That the right of voting in the borough of Portsmouth, as contended for by the petitioner, is in the mayor, "aldermen, and burgesses of the said be' rough only, such mayor, aldermen, and burgesses being resident within the said borough, and the limits and liberties thereof:' That the counsel for the sitting member delivered in a statement, as follows: "That the right of election of 'burgesses to serve in parliament for the borough of Portsmouth is in the mayor,
863
FOREIGN TRADE—SELECT COMMITTEE APPOINTED.]
Mr. Baring moved, "That a Select Committee be appointed to consider of the means of maintaining and improving the Foreign Trade of the country, and to report their opinion and observations thereon to the House "The motion was agreed to without any observations, and the following gentlemen were appointed members of the said committee, viz. Mr. Frederick Robinson, lord Castlereagh. Mr. Tierney, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Baring, Mr. Lamb, Mr. Thomas Wilson, Mr. Irving, Mr. Canning, Mr. Finlay, Mr. Wilmot, Mr. Gladstone, lord Althorp, Mr. Wallace, lord Milton, sir John Newport, sir M. W. Ridley, Mr. Keith Douglas, Mr. Huskisson, Mr. Sturges Bourne, Mr. As-tell, and Mr. Alexander Robertson;—with power to send for persons, papers, and records; and five to be the quorum: The petitions presented in the present session relating to commercial restrictions and duties on timber, were, on the motion of Mr. Baring and Mr. Marryat, referred to the said committee.
GRAMPOUND DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.]
Lord John Russell,
in rising to move the order of the day for the committal of the bill upon this subject, stated, that he did not feel it necessary at present to occupy much of the attention of the House, as he had already so fully explained the nature and object of the bill. With respect to the question, whether the
864
Mr. R. Smith
spoke in favour of the bill, which he thought highly honourable to the public spirit, judgment, and perseverance of his noble friend. But the laudable object of the bill would, in his opinion, be lost if the right of election were not transferred from Grampound to some other district;—he meant to some great populous town, from which a direct representation in that House was really necessary. If such a representation had existed for the great towns in the North, he firmly believed that that quarter of the country would not have been agitated in the course of the last autumn. But he was an advocate for this bill from a solicitude to establish parliamentary reform, as well as from a desire to satisfy the public mind. In speaking of reform, he did by no means imply those wild theories which were advocated by the would-be-patriots, who had so much disturbed the country in the course of the last year, and who were in truth the worst enemies of real liberty. He wished also to be understood, that when he urged the propriety of satisfying the public mind, he meant the intelligent, well regulated opinion of the country, which had unanimously decided in favour of reform, and against which all the eloquence of the
865
Mr. Serjeant Onslow
deprecated the idea of confining this measure merely to the extension of the right of voting to the hundreds adjoining Grampound, as such a proceeding must, among other exceptionable results, serve to give an undue right of voting to the freeholders of a particular district, and that too in a county which had the power of returning an amply sufficient number of members to that House. But upon what ground could the total disfranchisement be resisted? For, as to the precedents, where was the precedent to show such flagrant corruption as had existed in this borough, where no candidate dared even propose that the bribery oath should be administered? It was urged in objection to the proposal for transferring the right of election to Leeds, that there was no precedent for the creation of the right of voting by an act of parliament. But this allegation was an egregious mistake, as there were many such precedents. In Chester, in Durham, and in the Welsh counties for instance, the right of voting was created by different acts of parliament. With respect to the question, whether there should be four representatives for Yorkshire, or whether the right of electing two members should be conferred upon Leeds, he hoped the friends of this measure would not allow their strength to be weakened by any dissention upon such a question, but that all would unite in securing that which was most desirable, namely, the total and radical disfranchisement of Grampound.
The motion for going into the committee was about to be put, when the Speaker asked whether any hon. member meant to move an instruction to the committee? Upon which,
Mr. Davies Gilbert
said, that the case of Grampound was one which admitted of no justification, and it was impossible to deny that a system of corruption had for a long period of time existed in that borough, which called for the animadversion of the House. In considering, however, the remedy which it would be roost expedient to apply to an evil which was admitted on all hands to exist, he confessed himself unable to accede either to the proposition of the noble lord who
866
867
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
rose to move, that the farther discussion of this question be adjourned till to-morrow, alleging the absence of his majesty's ministers at a cabinet council, upon a subject of high importance, as the ground of this motion.
Lord J. Russell
said, he was willing to accede to any arrangement which might accommodate the right hon. gentleman, but he fell that upon the present occasion he was scarcely at liberty to do so, without the concurrence of his hon. friend the member for Durham, whose motion upon the state of the representation stood for to-morrow.
Mr. Lambton
said, that the House was called upon by the motion of the right hon. gentleman to postpone the debate upon a subject of considerable importance, but the right hon. gentleman had stated no public ground for that adjournment. He was aware that the right hon. gentleman and his colleagues felt themselves in a situation of some difficulty, in consequence of her majesty having embarked at Calais for this country, and that a cabinet council had been this day called upon the subject. This, however, was no ground for delaying the public business; and, though he had every wish to accommodate his noble friend, yet as his own motion upon parliamentary reform stood for to-morrow, he could not consent to the adjournment of this debate, unless some strong grounds for that measure were laid before the House.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that he had moved the adjournment of this debate, not from any considerations of personal convenience; but because their duty to their sovereign demanded the attendance of ministers in another place. It would be for the House to determine whether the debate should be adjourned till to-morrow, or to any other day.
868
After some further conversation the debate was adjourned till Monday.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS BILL.]
Upon the motion of lord Althorp, the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole House upon this bill.
Mr. Denman
objected to the appointment of three commissioners instead of one. He said, he was averse, in general to the investing any man or body of men with arbitrary power, but such a measure as this could never be efficient, unless the absolute power of carrying its provisions into effect were lodged in a single hand. Three judges in different places would follow different rules and precedents, and decide upon different principles. He thought there should be no appeal in these cases if an appeal were permitted, there would be great risk of a perpetual disagreement among the three members, or it would become a mere mockery of justice, and nothing more than a mere formal decision of the same case before the same court. It was contended that if only one commissioner were appointed, it would be necessary to have examiners out of court; but he saw no such necessity, nor did the proceedings in insolvent cases involve any investigations which one judge was not fully competent to undertake. Unless creditors exerted themselves to bring the property of their debtors under the control of the court, no exertions on the part of the court would be sufficient for that purpose. Upon public grounds, too, the unnecessary multiplication of judicial and other offices, was a subject which ought to be watched with extreme jealousy, and he could not help thinking, that if the committee suffered this clause of the bill to pass, they would give an indirect sanction to a transaction, which was felt throughout the country to be a very gross job; he alluded to the recent appointment of a fifth baron of the exchequer in Scotland. He moved, therefore, that instead of the words, "three-commissioners," the words "one commissioner"' be substituted.
Mr. Abercromby
observed, that the country was much indebted to the noble lord who had brought this measure before the House. The most essential part of the bill was, that there should be associated with the chief commissioner two commissioners who should examine accounts in private; and this he contended, was most desirable. In conclusion, he paid a
869
Sir F. Ommanney
argued in favour of the appointment of three commissioners.
Mr. D. W. Harvey
objected to the expense of the measure, and contended that from the seventy bankrupt commissioners the offices of the commissioners contemplated by the bill might advantageously be filled up. He admitted that three commissioners were better than one. It would prevent any exercise of arbitrary power, by allowing an appeal from the decision of an individual commissioner to the judgment of the commissioners in court assembled. The great advantage, as he understood it, of the noble lord's proposition was, that there would be two examiners under the name of commissioners, who being employed in examining accounts in private, would leave to the chief commissioner the principal administration of the law.
Mr. Abercromby
maintained, that the expense attendant on the measure would by no means be great, and that it would be most advantageously incurred. He agreed, that it was desirable to reduce the number of bankrupt commissioners, but he contended that the best way of doing so would be to adopt the present measure, which would so reduce the profits of the bankrupt commissioners, as speedily to diminish their number.
Mr. Wrottesley
objected to the bill, on the ground that it would occasion two systems to be going on at the same time. The late bill was a grievous disappointment to the country; for it had turned out to be one of the most mischievous and demoralizing legislative measures that had ever been adopted. If, however, the bill were to be adopted, he was sure that three commissioners would be necessary to administer it, and he trusted that they would be able to remedy some of the evils of the late bill.
After some desultory conversation, Mr. Denman agreed to withdraw his amendment. The original proposition for filling up the blank with the word "three" was agreed to. The other clauses were filled up, and the House resumed.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, June 6, 1820.
The King came in state to the House
870
KING'S MESSAGE RESPECTING THE ARRIVAL OF THE QUEEN.]
The Earl of Liverpool
presented a Message from the King, stating the arrival of the Queen, and announcing that his majesty had thought it right to communicate to the House certain Papers respecting the conduct of the Queen since her Majesty quitted this country, to which the king desired the earliest attention of the House. The message was read by the lord chancellor, and also by the clerk at the table.
The Earl of Liverpool
then laid upon the table a green bag, sealed, and apparently filled with papers, and said:—My lords, I have now the honour of laying upon the table, by the king's command, the Papers referred to in his majesty's most gracious message. It it my intention to-morrow to move an address to his majesty, which, without pledging the House in any manner to any opinion, as to the contents of the message, will be merely an address, returning the thanks of the House to his majesty for his most gracious communication, and declaring our readiness to take into our serious consideration the Papers communicated by his majesty's command. It is also my intention to move to-morrow to refer the papers thus communicated to a secret committee. In this course of proceeding his majesty's government have been guided by precedent, as far as precedent (and that of a very old date) can avail, it being well-known that there is no precent bearing directly upon the present case. It will be for the secret committee to point out whether any and what proceeding is fit to be adopted in consequence of the information afforded by the papers laid before them. I have now only to move that the lords be summoned to attend the service of this House to-morrow.—Ordered.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, June 6, 1820.
KING'S MESSAGE RESPECTING THE ARRIVAL OF THE QUEEN.]
Lord Castlereagh
presented the following Message from his majesty:
"GEORGE R.
"The king thinks it necessary, in con-
871
"The king has felt the most anxious desire to avert the necessity of disclosures and discussions which must be as painful to his people as they can be to himself; but the step now taken by the queen leaves him no alternative.
"The king has the fullest confidence that, in consequence of this communication, the House of Commons will adopt that course of proceeding, which the justice of the case, and the honour and dignity of his majesty's crown may require.
"GEORGE R."
Mr. Bennet
said:—Mr. Speaker, seeing no member near me disposed to put a question to the noble lord, and with a full persuasion of my own inablity, I still feel most anxious to know from him, whether a letter which has this day appeared in one of the public journals, and which purports to be the letter of lord Hutchinson
*
*
"Mr. Brougham having humbly submitted to the queen, that he bad reason to believe that lord Hutchinson had brought over a proposition from the king to her majesty, the queen has been pleased to command Mr. Brougham to request lord Hutchinson to communicate any such proposition as soon as possible, in writing. The bearer of this (Count Vassali) will
872
l.
l.
wait to receive it from your lordship.—June 4th, 1820."
To this letter lord Hutchinson sent a short note which stated that his lordship had no written proposals, but merely some scattered memoranda on scraps of paper. Mr. Brougham instantly sent the following reply to lord Hutchinson's note:
"Mr. Brougham is commanded by the queen to express to lord Hutchinson her majesty's surprise at his lordship not being ready to state the terms of the proposition of which he is the bearer: but as lord Hutchinson is desirous of a few hours delay, her majesty will wait until five o'clock, in the expectation of receiving a commu-
873
l.
Lord Castlereagh
observed, that he could not help admiring the peculiar temper un-
nication from his lordship at that hour.—2 o'clock, June 4th, 1820."
This letter was dated two o'clock on Sunday, and within a few minutes of the stipulated time, Mr. Brougham received the following letter from lord Hutchinson:
"Sir;—In obedience to the commands of the queen I have to inform you, that I am not in possession of any proposition or propositions detailed in a specific form of words which I could lay before her majesty; but I can detail to you for her information the substance of many conversations held with lord Liverpool. His majesty's ministers propose that 50,000
l.
874
'shore.' I cannot conclude this letter without my humble though serious and sincere supplication, that her majesty will take these propositions into her most calm consideration, and not act with any hurry or precipitation on so important a subject. I hope that my advice will not be misinterpreted. I can have no possible interest which would induce me to give fallacious counsel to the queen. But let the event be what it may, I shall console myself with the reflection that I have performed a painful duty imposed upon me to the best of my judgment and conscience, and in a case, in the decision of which the king, the queen, the government, and the people of England, are materially interested. Having done so, I fear neither obloquy nor misrepresentation. I certainly should not have wished to have brought matters to so precipitate a conclusion, but it is her majesty's decision, and not mine. I am conscious that I have; performed my duty towards her with every possible degree of feeling and delicacy. I have been obliged to make use of your brother's hand, as I write with pain and difficulty, and the queen has refused to give any, even the shortest delay—I have the honour to be sir, with great regard, your most obedient humble servant,
HUTCHINSON."
As soon as this letter was read by the queen, Mr. Brougham, at her majesty's request, made the following answer in writing:
"Mr. Brougham is commanded by the queen to acknowledge the receipt of lord Hutchinson's letter, and to inform his lordship, that it is quite impossible for her majesty to listen to such a proposition.—Five o'clock, June 4th, 1820."
875
Mr. Beaumont
did not consider the question put by his hon. friend at all calculated to throw any impediment in the progress of the course proposed by the noble lord. It appeared to him to be a very fair and reasonable question. From the want of an answer to it, and the evident disinclination of the noble lord to give it, it was evident that this extraordinary letter was genuine, but that his majesty's ministers were ashamed to own it [Hear, hear!].
Mr. Creevey
said, that it was not only competent for any member to ask such questions as the hon. member for Shrewsbury had asked without giving notice of them, but also to make a motion to the same effect. So convinced was he of the propriety of the question put with so much feeling by his hon. friend, that had it not been put, it was his intention to have moved for the production of the papers connected with the late negotiation at St. Omer's, and he actually held in his hand a notice of a motion which he had drawn up with a view to obtain it. He implored the House to consider the situation in which they were placed. They had a message from the king, desiring them to interfere in his behalf. And why? Because her majesty the queen had set her foot in England [Hear!]—for that now appeared to be the chief ground of her offence [Hear!]. Indeed his majesty appeared to have the same objection to her being in the same country with him, which he formerly had to her being in the same drawing-room. In order, therefore, to promote his majesty's wishes, they first
876
Sir Robert Wilson
assured the House that no motion had ever occasioned him more acute regret than that which had just been submitted to the consideration of the House; He trusted, however, that in the appeal which he was going to make to their generosity, he should meet with
877
Lord Archibald Hamilton
expressed his regret that a case of such importance should have been thrust upon the House—a case which required the most serious deliberation before any act should be done—before any resolution should be adopted. The queen had arrived in the metropolis of Great Britain; and how was she received? Not with the gratulations of the ministers of her husband; no, they had long prosecuted her with ignominy and with insult; they had caused her name to be erased from the Liturgy of the country, and they now brought forward what was tantamount to a charge, if not virtually an accusation against her. He had, therefore, taken the earliest opportunity of expressing his unbiassed sentiments on the subject, unconnected with, and uninfluenced by any person whatever. As
878
879
880
Mr. Denman
said, that it was not his intention at the present moment to enter into any discussion of this most important subject; for, both in a personal and constitutional view of the question, a fitter opportunity would probably hereafter occur. He confessed that he entertained some apprehension lest he should be betrayed into too strong an expression of those ardent feelings which the subject was calculated to excite, but which, however, gave him infinitely less alarm than the cold, calm, temperate manner in which a proposition of this nature had been brought forward by his majesty's ministers [Hear, hear!]—a proposition full of such weighty consequences to the illustrious individual and to the country. He could not trust himself to press this subject at the present moment; but in common justice to the illustrious individual, whose arrival in the country was greeted with an accusation founded upon paper and not upon witnesses, and which was to be referred, not to the ordinary tribunals of the country, but to a secret committee [Hear, hear!]—standing in the peculiar situation in which he did, he felt himself entitled to call upon the noble lord opposite to state distinctly, when he came down tomorrow to the re-consideration of this awful subject; what was the nature of the proceedings which it was intended to institute against her majesty?
Mr. Brougham
said, that at the present moment he would not enter into the merits of the subject, even to the length at which his hon. and learned friend had entered upon them. Unhappily (and he said this unfeignedly)—unhappily, not merely for the illustrious parties concerned, but for this House, for parliament, and for the country, a resolution appeared to have been taken which rendered any longer silence upon the subject almost impossible. The time had at length arrived when all men would be called upon to make up their minds upon this most important question, and when his lips would be unsealed from that silence which he had hitherto observed. At the present moment he should only say, and he thought it but fair to give the noble lord the warning, that his majesty's government would not only have to perform the task, and to succeed in the task, of making out a strong case against the queen; but they would have another task to execute, foremost in situation and paramount in importance, as regarded their own justification—they
881
The motion was agreed to, and on the motion of lord Castlereagh, the Papers were ordered to he kept in the custody of the clerk of the House.
PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.]
Mr. Lambton
said, that when he had last night stated his determination to oppose the motion of adjournment, unless some public ground were laid before the House, he had no conception that a measure of such great importance was about to be submitted by his majesty's ministers to
882
ARMY AND ORDNANCE ESTIMATES.]
The resolutions of the Committee of Supply being reported,
Mr. Calcraft
said, it had been his intention to make some observations on the present amount of our military establishment, which, if necessary at all, was, in his opinion, rendered necessary by the measures of government. This, however, would lead to a discussion of greater length than was desirable on the present occasion, and he should therefore defer the consideration of that topic to a future day. If no other opportunity were afforded, he should be driven to the necessity of submitting a substantive motion on the subject. New barracks were about to be built in all parts of the kingdom where none existed at present, and such an appearance of military government was about to be exhibited as had never before been presented in any country calling itself free.
On the reading of the resolution relative to pensions,
Mr. Hume
said, that since this subject had been discussed, on the moving of the ordnance estimates, he had referred to the act, and he regretted to say, that in section second there was a clause that might admit of the construction for which the right hon. gentleman had contended. He now begged to ask whether those pensions to which he had adverted in the committee of supply, and by which a retired allowance, amounting to one-half of their former salaries, had been granted to several persons, after a service of two, three, and four years, came under that clause of the act to which he had alluded r The object of the act was, in his opinion, to prevent pensions from being granted to individuals for less than ten years service, and he protested against any deviation from that principle, as tending to impose a great expense on the country.
Mr. R. Ward
observed, that he had
883
l.
Colonel Davies
said, his impression was, that the act applied to all cases, both of superannuation and reduction.
On the resolution for the Irish ordnance being put,
Mr. Calcraft
regretted that in the first year of the administration of the noble duke, so little attention had been paid to economy in the department over which he presided.
Mr. Ward
contended, that although there was an excess of 133,000
l.
l.
Mr. Calcraft
disclaimed any personal motive in the comments which he had felt it his duty to make.
Sir J. Newport
deprecated the idea of attributing any member's conduct to the influence of personal motives, or of supposing that to discuss the proceedings of a public officer, implied the existence of any personal zeal against that officer. It was absurd to maintain that the former services of the duke of Wellington, or of any other public man, should shield him from the responsibility which attached to any public office which he thought proper to accept.
Mr. Hume
expressed a wish, that with a view to simplify the public accounts, which were in general scarcely intelligible at present, and to enable the House the more easily to judge where any expendi-
884
Sir, J. Newport
protested against the idea of delegating the functions of that House to any committee, or of allowing ministers to transfer to such committees their responsibility for the public accounts.
The resolutions were agreed to.
WILFUL AND MALICIOUS INJURIES BILL.]
Mr. N. Calvert
moved for leave to bring in a bill for providing summary punishment for certain vexatious and malicious injuries. It was unfortunately a subject of just complaint that very great and wanton injuries were committed on young trees, plantations, gardens, &c, for which the present remedy at law was extremely dilatory and unequal. In moving to bring in such a bill, he was not at all entering upon an unusual way of proceeding; for there already existed statutes for the protection of timber-trees, banks, and dams of rivers, &c. Abroad, it was to be observed, that gardens, statues, and other articles of private property, as well ns trees loaded with fruit, and standing immediately by the road-side, were not subject to such malicious and vexatious injuries as those which the proposed bill would go to punish. But it was a mortifying reflection that there was no species of property in England which was exposed in public, that was not speedily injured or mutilated, from the common mile-
885
Leave was given, and the bill was brought in and read a first time.
IRISH PAUPERS.]
Mr. W. Parnell,
after an impressive appeal to the House upon the various hardships which Irish paupers were condemned to endure in their passage through this country, especially in returning to Ireland, observed, that scarcely a fourth of those who annually returned to Ireland were able to survive their sufferings. The hardships they underwent, which were but too often aggravated by the infliction of corporal punishment, were owing in a great measure to the manner in which their subsistence was provided for, that subsistence being paid for by the county, while the allowance to English paupers in their conveyance through the country was paid by the respective parishes. But the punishments inflicted upon the Irish paupers formed their greatest grievance, the lower order of English parish-officers, who charged those paupers as vagrants, being but too apt to consider Irishism as a crime. The hon. gentleman concluded with moving for the production of a copy of the correspondence between the seneschal of Belfast, and the chief secretary for Ireland, respecting paupers sent from England to Ireland.
Mr. Sturges Bourne
observed, that by the act of the last session, which he had the honour to propose, it was expressly provided that Irish vagrants should be passed to Ireland without any punishment at all. They therefore had at present an exemption which was not granted to English vagrants. For any grievance to which the Irish paupers were still subject, he should be happy to assist the hon. member in framing a remedy. But the fact was this, that there was no officer in Ireland to receive those paupers upon their arrival in that country, or to whom an order for removal to their native place could be directed; and the want of such an officer was, he believed, the great cause of the hardship to which those poor beings were at present subject on their arrival in their own country.
886
Sir J. Newport
said, that he should vote for the motion, although he must must confess his inability to see any permanent remedy for the grievances alluded to, but that remedy which would be worse than the disease, namely, the introduction of the system of the poor laws into Ireland, than which nothing was more to be deprecated, especially in a country where the paupers were so numerous, while those able to pay poor's-rate were comparatively so few. But still he felt that some temporary remedy should be devised for the relief, as far as it was practicable, of the poor beings alluded to. But then how was that remedy to be found? It would be unfair to saddle exclusively upon those districts of the Irish coast which were immediately opposite to England, the maintenance or the expence of transferring all paupers who should go over from this country; and from what fund was this expence to be defrayed?—He felt with his hon friend the necessity of providing some remedy in this case, but still he conceived it a question of infinite difficulty to adjust.
Mr. Williams
thought this a case which loudly called for inquiry.
Mr. W. Parnell
observed, that it was not because there were many political economists or few paupers in Ireland, that there were no poor laws in that country, but the fact was, that while the poor were objects of regard and consideration in this country, they were, he was sorry to say, mere objects of contempt in Ireland.
The motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, June 7, 1820.
MOTION FOR A SECRET COMMITTEE ON THE PAPERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE QUEEN.]
The Earl of Liverpool moved the order of the day for the consideration of his Majesty's Message, which was read by the clerk. His lordship then, in pursuance of his first notice, proceeded to move an address to his majesty in return for his message.
Lord Holland
wished to know with what measure his majesty's government meant to propose the examination of the papers laid on the table should be followed up, before the House was pledged to any opinion on the subject.
The Earl of Liverpool
observed, that the address he intended to move would, as he had stated yesterday, pledge their
887
The address was then put and agreed to.
The Earl of Liverpool
now rose to make the second motion of which he had given notice, and which related to the course of proceeding. He said, he meant to propose to their lordships that a secret committee consisting of fifteen lords, should be appointed by ballot to examine the papers relative to the conduct of the queen, which he had laid on the table yesterday, and to report thereon. This he considered the most suitable course of proceeding, with reference to the delicacy of the case, the illustrious person to whom the papers related, or indeed to any person whatever who might be the object of such an inquiry. He was on the present occasion particularly desirous of saying as little as possible, and wished to reserve himself until he saw whether any of their lordships thought the course he proposed liable to objection. In that case, he would be ready to give any explanation which might appear necessary. He had yesterday stated, that the purpose for which he would propose to appoint the committee would be, to inquire whether any or what, further proceedings should take place on the papers submitted to their examination. This would be the object of their report. He had thought it necessary to state this yesterday, to guard against misunderstanding, and he thought it necessary to repeat it now. He trusted there was not a man in the House, or in the country, who would suppose him capable of proposing a mode of proceeding against any person, and least of all against the illustrious person who was the object of this measure, without allowing the fullest opportunity for defence. But the course now suggested, he was convinced, was the most proper in point of delicacy towards the illustrious person, and the best with respect to all the important interests connected with the case. Here he wished to leave the subject, being prepared, however, to give such explanation as might, in consequence of observations from any of their lordships, appear necessary. He concluded by moving the appointment of the committee.
The Marquis of Lansdowne
said, he had
888
889
890
891
The Earl of Liverpool
rose, in consequence of what had fallen from the noble marquis, to give such explanation as it was in his power to give on. the present occasion. He trusted that the answer he
892
893
894
Lord Holland
observed, that a great part of the speech of the noble earl had gone to establish the principle, that if their lordships concurred in the appointment of the secret committee moved for, they would by that concurrence, convey the opinion that no judicial proceeding could be instituted before them on the application of the Commons House of Parliament. In this opinion he agreed; but his conviction of its justness constituted his objection to the course recommended. The noble earl opposite had given it as the opinion of many lawyers, that a queen could not be impeached of high treason for adultery committed with a foreigner; but. could he assure their lordships that this would be the opinion of the other House of Parliament, the grand inquest of the nation, with whom an impeachment might originate? All that their lordships knew was, that his majesty had sent to the other House a message, accompanied with papers containing matter of accusation against her majesty. When, then, their lordships heard that the queen-consort was accused, and that evidence had been transmitted to the Commons in support of that accusation, how could they be assured that
895
896
897
The Lord Chancellor
said, that he never had had so painful a duty to discharge as the present. The difficulty arose partly front the connexion of the proceedings with an illustrious person, whose situation in the state commanded respect and reverence. But when he said this, he did not mean to insinuate that to the rank of the party belonged any greater title to justice than to the meanest subject. If a secret committee were to decide on the character or the interests of any individual, he would be the last man to agree to such an appointment. He would rather at once refer the papers to the House. But the appointment of a secret committee, while it could not be unjust in its decision, it not being allowed to decide, was designed to prevent injustice. The objection of his noble friend to the appointment of a committee did not appear to him well founded. There might be judicial proceedings at the instance of the Commons, after the com-
898
899
The Marquis of Lansdowne
explained He had said that it was impossible for the House to be assured that the Commons would not institute judicial proceedings, and therefore that their lordships, by appointing a committee and adopting its report, would be previously deciding on charges which would afterwards come before them for judgment. There were other crimes and misdemeanors besides high treason that might be brought before their lordships, and by appointing this committee they disqualified themselves for deciding on all. There was no trust of greater importance, and therefore, none more deserving to become the subject of public investigation, than the trust which appertained to the situation of the queen of England. Could the noble lord take upon himself to say, that it would not be competent to the House of Commons, with respect to any act which constituted a breach of that trust, to bring the illustrious person in question, not under a charge of treason, but of high misdemeanor, before their lordships? Might not that mode of proceeding appear to the House of Commons to be the most fitting and decorous; I and when the noble and learned lord com-pared the situation of the House to that of: a grand jury, did he not forget that a grand jury could never afterwards become the petty jury who tried and decided upon the merits of the cause?
The Earl of Donoughmore
could not allow the question to be put without stating the nature of his opinion to the House, particularly as that opinion was at variance with the sentiments of individuals with whom he had long been in the habit of acting, and for whose motives and conduct he entertained the sincerest respect. Differing from those noble persons, he felt that he ought to distrust his own judgment, but he could not consent to give up his opinion. The noble lords
900
901
Lord Holland
rose to explain. He said that the arguments which he had addressed to the House had been misunderstood both by the noble and learned lord upon the woolsack, and by the noble lord who had last spoken. The noble and learned lord had directed great part of his speech against that which had formed no part of his speech, or of the speech of his noble friend. The noble lord who had just sat down had spoken of the irritation of the public mind, and had expressed his disapprobation of the means by which that irritation had been excited. Certainly, he was much, mistaken if he had said any thing calculated to increase that irritation and if there were arts cmplo3'ed to raise it, of which he knew nothing and accused no one, he would say, that whether such means were taken either in parliament or out of it, either in writings or in conversations, he from his heart abhorred and abjured both the means and those who would resort to them [Hear, hear] He must be allowed to state, that, when he alluded to the irritation of the public mind he did not mean to urge that such irritation ought to induce the House to do right, as if it would have neglected to do right in case no such feverish sensibility had existed; but merely to contend that, where two modes of proceeding presented themselves, which hypothetically, might be considered as indifferent, and where a strong public feeling did exist, that in such a case it was equally the duty and the policy of men intrusted with the government of a people to select that course which, without defeating or disappointing justice, was most likely to remove both irritation and suspicion. He had been charged, as well as his noble friend with objecting to the severity of the present proceeding. He had not said that the present proceeding was more severe than any other. He had also
902
ex parte
The Marquis of Lansdowne
wished that the explanation of his noble friend should be considered as applying equally to the observations which he himself had addressed to the House.
The motion was agreed to without a division.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, June 7, 1820.
BOROUGHBRIDGE ELECTION.]
Mr. Legh Keck informed the House, that the Select Committee appointed to try the merits of the Boroughbridge Election petition, had determined, "That it appeared to the said committee, that the merits of the petition did depend in part upon the right of election; and that therefore the said committee required the counsel for; the several parties to deliver to the clerk of the said committee, statements in writ-
903
Ordered, that the deputy clerk of the Crown do attend to-morrow to amend the said Return.
904
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE—ROBERT C. BURTON, ESQ.]
Mr. Stuart Wortley presented a petition from Messrs. Bolton, Gleadon, Thompson, and Frost, of Hull; and also of A. Rosser, of London, who had been ordered to attend at the bar of the House for a breach of privilege, in bringing an action of escape against the warden of the Fleet for discharging R. C. Burton, esq. from his custody, in consequence of an order of that House. The petition stated, that the two first petitioners were assignees, and the two latter petitioners, one the attorney and the other the agent to the attorney of the assignees of the estate of a bankrupt to whom R. C. Burton, esq. was indebted—that they had brought the action by advice of counsel—that they had no intention of violating the privileges of the House—and that they had, as soon as they were aware that they violated them, discontinued the action, and paid the costs of such discontinuance to the warden of the Fleet. They therefore prayed that, in consequence of their contrition, no further proceedings might be instituted by the House against them. On the motion of Mr. Wynn, it was resolved, "That, in consideration of the petitioners having severally acknowledged their offence, and expressed their contrition for the same, this House is content to proceed no further in the matter of the said breach of privilege."
TRANSACTIONS AT MANCHESTER.]
Sir Francis Burdett postponed his motion relative to the conduct of the Manchester magistrates on the 16th of August last, which stood for to-morrow, to the 21st instant.
IRISH STILL FINES BILL.]
Sir J. Stewart
moved for leave to bring in a bill to repeal so much of an act of the 39th of the late king, for the suppressing of the illicit distillation of spirits in Ireland, and the imposing of fines for offences of that nature on townlands and baronies, as directed grand juries to present off counties half the expenses of the extraordinary police establishment required under the provisions of the same act.
General Hart,
in seconding the motion, observed, that the excise officers of Ireland were now, by the existing laws, in-trusted with the management of a sort of extraordinary police. In consequence of the late acts to prevent illicit distillation, many districts of Ireland were reduced to
905
bona fide
Lord Mountcharles
expressed his readiness to assist in any bill for the getting rid of the military police introduced into many parts of Ireland by the existing excise laws. He adverted to the great number of informations for illicit distillation at the last assizes at Donegal; and was of opinion, that ministers were called upon to relieve Ireland from so great a burthen as was imposed on her by the present excise laws.
Leave was given.
COMMUNICATION FROM THE QUEEN.]
Mr. Brougham, her Majesty's attorney-general, acquainted the House that he was commanded by her Majesty to lay before the House the following communication from her Majesty:
"The Queen thinks it necessary to inform the House of Commons, that she has been induced to return to England in consequence of the measures pursued against her honour and her peace for some time past by secret agents abroad, and lately sanctioned by the conduct of the government at home. That in adopting this course, her majesty has had no other purpose whatsoever, but the defence of her character, and the maintenance of those just rights, which have devolved upon her by the death of that revered monarch, in whose high honour and unshaken affection she had always found her surest support.
"Upon her arrival, the queen is surprised to find that a message has been sent down to parliament, requiring its attention to written documents; and she learns with still greater astonishment that there is an intention of proposing that these should be referred to a secret committee. It is this day fourteen years since
906
"In the face of the sovereign, the parliament, and the country, she solemnly protests against the formation of a secret tribunal to examine documents privately prepared by her adversaries, as a proceeding unknown to the law of the land, and a flagrant violation of all the principles of justice: she relies with full confidence upon the integrity of the House of Commons for defeating the only attempt she has any reason to fear.
"The queen cannot forbear to add, that, even before any proceedings were resolved upon, she has been treated in a manner too well calculated to prejudge her cause. The omission of her name in the liturgy, the withholding the means of conveyance usually afforded to all the branches of the royal family, the refusal even of an answer to her application for a place of residence in the royal mansions, and the studied slights, both of English ministers abroad, and of the agents of all foreign powers over whom the English government has any influence, must be viewed as measures designed to prejudice the world against her, and could only have been justified by trial and conviction."
MOTION FOR A SECRET COMMITTEE ON THE PAPERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE QUEEN.]
The order of the day for taking his Majesty's Message into consideration, and also the message itself, having been read,
Lord Castlereagh
expressed his persuasion, that in rising to call the attention of the House to the message which had just been read, and to propose that course of proceeding which it appeared proper to pursue, the House would readily perceive the great pain of the duty which devolved on him in introducing to their notice one of the most delicate, anxious, and momentous public questions that ever was agitated in parliament. And he could assure them, that if he and his colleagues were not confident that every consistent and practicable effort had been made on the part of government to avert the pain-
907
908
in limine,
909
910
in limine,
911
912
913
914
915
ex-parte
916
917
918
919
l.
920
l.
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
Mr. Brougham
assured the House and the noble lord, that the noble lord himself could not have risen with greater pain than he did on the present occasion. That pain, however, was occasioned not by any reluctance to perform that which he felt to be his bounden duty, but from his consciousness of the importance of the interests entrusted to his care. The hour was now come when it was incumbent on him to defend those interests to the best of his ability, although under the consciousness of his inadequacy to so great a task. On such an occasion it was natural that he should feel an anxiety, painful on every consideration; whether he regarded the vital importance of the discussion to the illustrious individual most immediately concerned, to the dignity of that great family with which that illustrious individual was connected by blood and marriage, or to the interests of the community at large. Nor was it less important as it regarded the constitutional course of justice, and the character of parliament. To that parliament the illustrious lady to whom the present question referred, made her appeal. She courted not those mobs of which the noble lord had spoken. Her sagacity, not inferior to that of any person in public or private life, whom he had ever known, and the propriety of her mind, which, in spite of the calumnies which had been so industriously circulated, was not impaired by what was so generally ruinous to the delicacy of a female—absence from her family, where delicacy of character was best cherished—a removal from the country deprecated by her, but to which she felt it necessary to submit—and, above all, the withdrawing of that salutary control which more than any other cause established domestic habits, and was the best preserver of female propriety and delicacy—he repeated, that that sagacity and propriety with which nature had largely endowed her,
929
930
931
932
prima facie
ex parte
933
934
935
936
937
l.
l.
938
incognito.
l.,
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
Mr. Canning
declared, that as he had never risen to deliver his sentiments on a subject of so much delicacy and interest as that before the House, so had he never before been called upon to discharge a duty to himself so painful and embarrassing. The occasion out of which the necessity for performing this duty arose, and the circumstances connected with it, were of a nature as novel as they were delicate. He had listened with the greatest attention to the speech of the hon. and learned gentleman who had just sat down. In every syllable uttered by the hon. and learned gentleman respecting the mischief likely to result from the inquiry into which they were now unhappily forced, he entirely concurred. It was utterly impossible that such an inquiry should turn to the advantage of the country, or of the parties whom it immediately concerned. The dearest interests of the country, and the character of the most illustrious personages whom it contained were undoubtedly involved in the proceeding. But having said this, he must follow it by saying that from all that part of the hon. and learned gentleman's speech which went to impute to his majesty's ministers the responsibility of forcing on this inquiry, he utterly and wholly dissented. In taking up the challenge which the hon. and learned gentleman had thrown down on this subject last night, he was fully prepared to show not only that his majesty's ministers did not voluntarily come down to parliament to originate this inquiry as matter of choice, not only that they had not sought the occasion for it—not only that they had deprecated it with all their hearts—but, that they had interposed every possible expedient to prevent the occurrence of a calamity which they were anxious with all their power and all their means to avert.
951
952
953
954
l.
l.
l.
955
l.
l.;
956
l.
l.
l.;
957
958
l.
renounce
959
incognito
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
Mr. Brougham,
in rising to explain, ex-
970
971
972
973
Mr. Tierney
said, it was impossible that any man of good feelings could come to this question without the deepest anxiety. He thanked God, that he had nothing to do with the negotiations which seemed to have brought all the parties concerned in them into a piteous plight. All he knew of them was what he had picked up in the course of the discussion. If only the speech of the right hon. gentleman who had last spoken, had been uttered, he should have felt himself bound to say a few words, because without any negotiation at all, and without even any consciousness on his part, it had been proved by the right hon. gentleman, by an argument like the House that Jack Built, one thing drawing on another, that he who knew nothing about these negotiations, was the cause of every one of them; for that if it had not been for the clause which he had introduced into the bill of 1814, limiting the income of the then princess of Wales to the life of his late majesty, nothing of this kind could possibly have occurred. He begged leave to explain that circumstance. At that time it was proposed to give her majesty for life an income of 50,000
l.
l.
974
l.
l.
975
976
977
"Behold a proof of Irish sense,
Here Irish wit is seen;
When nothing's left that's worth defence,
They build a magazine."
978
l.
979
ex parte
980
981
Mr. Wilberforce
said, there was nothing but the absolute despair of any reconciliation or adjustment in this case, which would compel him to abandon the course which he now felt it his duty to adopt, with a view of preventing the dreadful discussions with which they were threatened. His hon. and learned friend had stated, that the proposition respecting the title of the queen, which had been made in a different sense from that which had been submitted to him, was the chief cause of the unfortunate termination of the negotiation. That alone was a powerful reason with him for thinking that an accommodation was not yet impossible. He could not help entertaining also some hopes, not only from the circumstance, that the present proceedings became in some degree necessary from the conclusion of the negotiation abroad, but also from the circumstance that the proceedings had commenced so soon after the arrival of the queen. He believed there was not a man in the House who did not participate in his feeling of wishing, if possible, to prevent the investigation from proceeding farther if it were possible; because if the step then recommended to them was once taken, retreat would be found impossible after it. If he discovered a spirit in the House likely to accede to such a suggestion, he would propose an adjournment of this question for a day or two, in order to see whether, through the instrumentality of common friends, some compromise might not take place between the two parties. On every account, such a measure would be desirable, and, amongst others, on account of the public
982
Mr. Fowell Buxton
rose for the purpose of seconding a motion which, if adopted, would carry with it the blessings of the country. If the motion, on the contrary, were rejected, evils were impending over the country, of which no man, however wise, could foresee the termination, and which no man, however bold, could contemplate without apprehension. His majesty had condescended in this emergency to ask advice from parliament, and it was impossible that parliament could offer to the monarch any advice more salutary than to spare to himself, to the Crown, to that House, and to the morality, the delicacy, and the reputation of the whole country, disclosures at once so perilous and so painful as those with which the public ear was at the present moment threatened.
The original motion and the amendment having been put,
Mr. Wynn
said, that after the manner in which the motion had been seconded, he should only say, that he believed it was a motion consonant with his feelings, and, he believed, with the feelings of every honest man in the country.
983
Mr. S. Wortley
said, that after what had taken place he had very little hope of any compromise; but as a great many members thought that the delay might produce a compromise, the House would do well to consider whether it ought not to make that small sacrifice.
Mr. R. Martin
said, that whilst he considered it an honour to be what was called a party-man, and had usually voted with ministers, he did not think this a question of party. He should therefore vote against the original question, and support the adjournment. It was his wish to notice a declaration made by a right hen. gentleman respecting the residence of the queen. He dissented from those who thought that such an adjustment was likely to take place as would render this country an agreeable residence for her majesty. He thought this a subject pregnant with mischief; and the best way to promote an amicable adjustment was, in his opinion, for the queen to remove from this country. Her majesty might remain at some near port, where she could have the means of communicating immediately with her legal advisers. But the longer she remained in London, the greater the danger was, and the more injurious it might prove to the country. He wished to know from a worthy alderman opposite (Wood), whether he had advised the queen in her present course of proceeding.
Sir T. Acland
felt that his majesty's ministers would not pursue the line of conduct which had hitherto entitled them to the good opinion of the country, if they persevered in the motion which had been brought before the House. Precipitation might produce consequences the most alarming, and the postponement of the question could at least not be productive of any ill-effects. On what ac-
984
Mr. Gooch
said, he felt great delight on hearing the motion for an adjournment offered to the consideration of the House by the hon. member. A few days would not injure the consideration of the question, and he hoped that his majesty's ministers would consent to the delay.
Sir E. Knatchbull
interacted his majesty's ministers to accede to the proposition. In so doing, they would give satisfaction to a large portion of the House, and to the country.
Mr. Davenport
intreated ministers to consent to allow the House and the country time to pause, and to reflect on the important subject, by agreeing to the motion of an adjournment.
Lord Castlereagh
said, he would not oppose the motion for delay. It marked the spirit which pervaded the House; and that spirit was the same in which, he trusted, it would be allowed ministers themselves had acted. He could not be responsible for the effect of the delay; indeed, it was his conviction that little could be expected from it; but he was not therefore the less disposed to bow to the wisdom of those who entertained a different opinion, and had expressed that opinion. It was not his intention to enter into dispute; but, if he had been disposed for controversy, provocation had not been wanting. If ever he had listened to a speech calculated to induce an individual to commit himself, it was the speech which had been delivered by the right hon. gentleman opposite; and there was one sentence in that speech, upon which he would try to draw down the indignation of the House. It had, by the right hon. gentleman, been made a reproach to ministers, that they had not counselled his majesty to take a different course from that which he had thought it proper upon this occasion to pursue. To what the sovereign
985
The question upon Mr. Wilberforce's motion, "that this debate be adjourned until Friday next," was then put, and carried without a division.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, June 8, 1820.
SECRET COMMITTEE ON THE PAPERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE QUEEN BALLOTED FOR.]
The Earl of Liverpool moved the order of the day for proceeding to ballot for a secret committee, pursuant to the vote of last night. The clerks were about to hand about the balloting glasses, when
Lord Kenyon
rose to propose the postponement of the order, as he saw no other noble lord disposed to interfere. Concurring as he did in the wisdom of the measure which their lordships had yesterday resolved to adopt, it might appear extraordinary that he should propose any thing calculated to prevent its being carried into effect. Indeed, considering the nature of the message which had been received from the throne—considering also what was due to the dignity of the illustrious parties, as well as to the propriety of their lordships proceedings—he had regarded the appointment of the committee the only fit course to be adopted. It was a proceeding to which their lordships were driven by the necessity of the case; but he understood that circumstances had arisen from which there was reason to hope that the very painful consequences which were to be anticipated from the measure their lordships had agreed to if it were to be proceeded in, might yet be averted. Under these circumstances, he entertained a confident expectation that their lordships would be
986
The Earl of Liverpool
—My lords; with reference to what has been said by my noble friend, I think it necessary to state, that no circumstance has been communicated to me, nor have I any information to authorize me in holding out any prospect of conciliation. Far be it from me, however, to negative so desirable an object, which must be the wish of every man who at all considers the subject; but what I object to is, that nothing has been stated sufficient to induce this House to recede from its vote of last night, by not proceeding to the ballot. Let us proceed to the ballot, and then it will be perfectly consistent with the regularity of our proceedings to postpone the meeting of the committee for a few days, in order that as opportunity may be given for the possibility of conciliation, if such is the wish of the House. I should therefore propose, after the ballot has taken place, that the meeting of the committee should be postponed till Tuesday.
The Marquis of Lansdowne
was not surprised to find that noble lords should, on reflection, call upon the House to undo to-day what it had done yesterday; but in whatever light the proposition might appear, he was favourable to the proposed delay. He was ready to support the
987
Lord Kenyon
noticed what had been said by the marquis of Lansdowne, in the commencement of his speech, respecting: the undoing today what had been done yesterday—an expression which appeared to give much satisfaction to a noble lord neat him ford Holland had smiled when the noble marquis made the observation referred to]. He was one of those who had approved the course adopted yesterday, but he did not on that account conceive that there was any impropriety in now proposing to suspend the proceeding.
The Marquis of Lansdowne
explained, that he had no intention of applying what he had said to the conduct of the noble baron in particular.
988
Lord Kenyon
then observed that, whether it should be their lordships pleasure to adopt his motion or; not, he had at least the satisfaction of having drawn from the noble earl an acquiescence in the propriety of delay. What the noble earl, however, proposed was, to appoint the committee, but to allow nothing to be done till Tuesday. He thought it would be a better way to postpone the consideration of the subject altogether while the slightest hope of any conciliatory arrangement existed. As long as any hope could be indulged, he should not think that he did his duty if he did not endeavour to gain time; and as the best and most consistent mode of obtaining that object was, in his opinion, to suspend the proceeding in its present state, he should persist in his motion, and hoped that their lordships would come with him to the conclusion that the order for appointing the committee ought to be postponed to Monday.
The Earl of Lauderdale
was as anxious to agree to any course which might have a conciliatory effect as the noble baron or his noble friend could be, but he knew of nothing out of that House that ought to be a rule for what it was proper for their lordships to do. He made this observation because the debate had been proceeding in a most disorderly manner. He had never before, in the course of his experience, heard it assigned as a reason for their lordships not proceeding in a measure which they had agreed to adopt, that the other House of Parliament had chosen to decide otherwise. The House had acted on its own judgment; and if delay was thought advisable, the only question which now arose was, which of the modes suggested was most consistent with the dignity of the House? He might join his noble friend in his triumph at the hope of their lordships being compelled to retrace their steps, but it was his duty to consider what was now fittest to be done, and he did not hesitate to say that the mode proposed by the noble earl opposite was that which appeared to him the best.
Lord Holland
could not agree with the view of the question which had been taken by his noble friend who had just sat down. In the mean time, however, he begged to assure the noble baron who had noticed the expression of his countenance, that that expression was accompanied by of feeling of disapprobation, of what the noble baron proposed. On the contrary
989
990
991
The Earl of Liverpool
could not allow; the speech of the noble lord to pass without observation. The proceeding of yesterday had nothing to do with the delay now proposed. It was not said that their lordships should wait for a contemporaneous proceeding of the other House, but the proposition was made with the knowledge that the two Houses were to proceed contemporaneously. The House, however, would act on its own view of the case. He had not said that all such measures should be contemporaneous in both Houses; but he still maintained the opinion he had given, that if the present case was to be proceeded in at all, the proper way was by that, and the other House of parliament entering on the measure at the same time. The postponement to Tuesday next was no abandonment of what had already been done, and might have been proposed by any noble lord without reference to what had occurred in another place. He made the proposition without reference to any facts or circumstances which had come to his knowledge. If from the nature of the case, any good result might arise from the delay, an opportunity was afforded for that advantage; but there was nothing in the proposition of delay to impeach the propriety of the proceeding of yesterday.
The Earl of Carnarvon
was for the postponement of the ballot, and thought the adoption of the noble baron's motion the course which common sense dictated. What was the only ground for delay? It was obviously the possibility that some circumstances might arise which would render it unnecessary to form any committee on the case. The noble earl's rather clumsy way of obtaining delay by postponing the sitting of the committee: to Tuesday was virtually the same as the motion of the noble baron. He could not fix Monday for the meeting of the committee, because, if an arrangement should take place after to-morrow, the House would not have the opportunity of preventing the committee from proceeding to the investigation of the papers on the day on which they would be ordered to sit. When no advantage was gained by the noble earl's mode, he thought it would be more becoming in their lordships to
992
The Earl of Darnley
supported the motion of the noble baron, by the adoption of which he thought their lordships would best consult the dignity of the House
Lord Erskine
said;—My lords; as my noble friend below me informs me that he shall divide the House upon the question, I must trouble your lordships, contrary to my intention, with a very tow words. If the ballot had been only objected to, both yesterday and to-day, on the ground that delay was adviseable, I should consider it as a matter of the most perfect indifference whether we delayed ballotting, or the sitting of the committee to be appointed; but the ballot was resisted, and with great ability and eloquence, on the ground that the proceeding under it would be highly unconstitutional—a proposition to which I can by no means agree. It has been stated, that if we proceed contemporaneously with the House of Commons we shall be placed in a situation which would disqualify us from trying an impeachment, if the Commons should impeach. But in the case before us there can be no reason to presume that such proceeding will take place. The case is shortly this:—evil reports respecting the conduct of the queen beyond the seas (which I sincerely hope, on investigation, will prove groundless) called upon his majesty nevertheless to notice them. The king, by his accession, does not forfeit the rights of a private man, though his situation is changed. He cannot proceed for such a private wrong, like a private man, but as his consort is a public person, representing the nation as well as himself, he must proceed through the public councils; and in a case of great and painful necessity he has applied to both Houses of Parliament for advice. That act of his majesty negatives every idea of an impeachment, and shows that what he seeks is a legislative inquiry, and an act of parliament, if unfortunately it should be necessary; because we ought not to presume that the king asks us to put ourselves in a situation disqualifying us from what might afterwards be our duty, which I agree would be the case if we were now to examine the evidence,
993
994
The Earl of Rosslyn
said, he would endeavour to bring back the attention^ of their lordships to the true state of the business, and he was not desirous to notice that part of the speech of his noble friend, which chiefly appeared to him to be an argument growing out of the debate that passed yesterday, farther than to set him right with respect to what had taken place because he conceived there was not one word which he then heard uttered on this subject that conveyed any wish either to refuse such proceedings as it might be deemed fit to adopt at a proper time, and after due consideration, or to deprive his majesty, or any other individual, of any relief or remedy that might be devised when the case was investigated. The argument, this he understood it yesterday, was, to persuade their lordships not to place themselves, by any act, in a situation that must embarrass them, if a judicial proceeding were begun by the other House of Parliament. They were called on, not to adopt any proceeding that might seem to imply the prejudging of a case with respect to which they were to be the ultimate judges; and, therefore, it was argued, that they ought not to proceed with any examination, or to offer any opinion, either of which was likely to
995
996
Lord Ellenborough
saw little difference in the two modes that were proposed. It was of little matter, with respect to the dignity and consistency of their proceedings, whether they adjourned the appointment of the committee, or, having appointed it, adjourned its proceedings. He, however, wished that the committee should now be balloted for, and that it should be directed to meet on Saturday. He proposed this course, because he was convinced that, if there was any chance of a successful arrangement, it could only be obtained by their lordships showing an absolute determination to proceed in the course agreed to yesterday, if between this day and that which he had mentioned, an amicable adjustment was not effected. It was impossible that the negotiation could be drawn out to any great length and he was sure that it would be shortened by the means which he now pointed out. In his opinion a satisfactory arrangement could only be obtained by proceeding in that manner.
The Earl of Donoughmore
said, so many allusions had been made to what had passed in another place, that it almost looked as if the members had been transposed from the one House to the other. In the place to which he alluded, they thought they had not sufficient reason to proceed, and they adjourned the debate; but undoubtedly that was no reason that should induce their lordships to stay the proceedings. This was not all, however; the subject was now treated as if their lordships had also adjourned the debate yesterday, for they had heard no arguments from his noble friends this evening that had not been urged in the course of their speeches last night. And why were they called on to pause? Truly, because in the other House of Parliament the debate had been adjourned. What reason had been laid before them to alter the course of their proceedings, which had been so solemnly decided upon last night—decided too by so great a majority, that those who differed in opinion from that majority did not think it proper to call for a division? What sort of argument was advanced, in order I to induce them to depart from the proceeding originally contemplated? He had
997
998
The Marquis of Lansdowne
said, that as a reproach had been cast against his noble friend near him and himself, on account of what had fallen from them, he felt himself called on to say that the accusation was not well founded. He, in common with the rest of their lordships, had a right, he conceived, to give an opinion on every part of these proceedings. Neither he nor his noble friend had expressed any desire to thwart the proceedings which had taken place in the House last night. It would be recollected, that he had not proposed to change that proceeding, which could not now in fact be recalled. He had risen to express an opinion in favour of the proposition of the noble baron opposite, who suggested the propriety of suspending the ballot till Monday. The noble earl opposite wished also that the proceeding should be suspended, but in another way. Nothing was, however, said by any noble lord, as to the propriety of altering the course which had been marked out last night. What he had said referred entirely to the comparative benefit that was likely to be derived from one of the modes proposed by the noble lords opposite, both of whom—he would not say, on account of what occurred in another House last night, lest he might incur the reproach of his noble friend who spoke last—seemed to have been impressed at the same moment with the necessity of suspending that course of proceeding on which, last night, their lordships had determined to act. What he had argued (and after what he had heard, his opinion was greatly strengthened, since the same feeling was expressed by the noble baron and the noble earl, and appeared to be participated in by the whole House) was, that the proceeding should be suspended. It was more consistent, he conceived, with true dignity, to express that feeling on the first occasion, instead of making believe, by the appointment of a committee, that they were determined to go OD, although circumstances might occur which might call on them to undo all that had previously been done. There was more dignity, he conceived, in taking the best means that occurred to them to prevent this committee, if possible, from sitting at all, than to hurry on the proceeding without making such an effort. He lamented that he
999
Their lordships then divided: Contents, present 82.—Proxies, 26–108: Non-Contents, present, 26—Proxies 3–29.—Majority for the earl of Liverpool's motion, 79. A committee of scrutiny was then appointed to inspect the balloting glasses. In a short time they returned to the House, when their chairman, the earl of Shaftesbury stated that the majority of suffrages had been given to the following peers:—The Archbishop of Canterbury, the lord chancellor, the lord president of the council, the duke of Beaufort, the duke of Northumberland, the marquis of Lansdowne, the marquis of Buckingham, the earl of Liverpool, the earl of Donoughmore, earl Beauchamp, viscount Sidmouth, the bishop of London, lord Re-desdale, lord Erskine, and the earl of Lauderdale. The committee were ordered to meet on Tuesday next.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, June 8, 1820.
PETITION FROM WESTMINSTER AGAINST THE ALIENS REGULATION BLLL.]
Mr. Bennet presented a petition from the inhabitants of Westminster, setting; forth, "That the petitioners, the there-undersigned inhabitants of the city and liberties of Westminster, loyal and dutiful subjects of his majesty, not more anxious to preserve their own freedom and happiness than, as far as in them lies, to maintain the dignity, and provide for the permanent security of his majesty's Crown, cannot refrain from humbly expressing to the House their conviction., that any act which in time of peace shall invest the ministers of the Crown with the absolute power of sending aliens out of the kingdom, at the sole pleasure of those ministers, is contrary to the principles of that constitution under which the petitioners and their ancestors have so long been the envy of the rest of mankind; that the petitioners would think it right, under any circumstances to petition against the passing of such an act, but that, under the present circumstances, when, as the petitioners perceive, proceedings of a judicial nature, under the advice and on the responsibility of the ministers of the Crown, are about to be commenced against an illustrious personage, on ac count of acts alleged to have been com-
1000
"Ordered to he on the table.
LANDLORDS AND TENANTS BILL.]
Mr. Tennyson
rose, pursuant to a notice he had given, to ask for leave to bring in a bill "for enabling Landlords more speedily to recover possession of Farms, unlawfully held over by Tenants," and he trusted the House would give him credit for being aware of the difficulties and embarrassments which surrounded him in approaching a subject, which had at different periods been ineffectually undertaken by persons infinitely more competent to the task than himself. Imputations of inconvenient delay, and of expense disproportioned to the object of litigation, had been frequently, and freely applied to the administration of the law in this country. There was some compensation, perhaps, in the diminution of suits, and the compromise of differences, necessarily consequent upon the unwillingness of parties to engage in dilatory and expensive proceedings, yet, in cases where an indisputable right existed on the one hand, which was fraudulently or forcibly withheld on the other, and where it was absolutely essential for the common purposes of substantial justice, between man and man, in the ordinary and unavoidable
1001
1002
1003
1004
Leave was given to bring in the bill; which was accordingly brought in, and read a first time.
IRISH PROTECTING DUTIES.]
The House having resolved itself into a committee on the Irish Protecting Duties,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer,
after adverting to several protecting duties which had been granted to various branches of Irish trade by the act of Union, and which would cease in the present year, declared it to be his intention
1005
l.
Mr. Ricardo
said, he was glad to see even that the time was to come when the country would rouse to those right principles, from which there never should have been any deviation; and hoped, that when the question of bounties with respect to linen, was brought forward, a proposition would be adopted to limit the existence of those bounties also to a certain period, as they were quite as objectionable, upon principle, as the duties referred to in the resolutions before the committee.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
concurred with the general principles of the hon. gentleman, but he perceived that the hon. gentleman himself was not prepared to apply those principles to Ireland. The situation of Ireland was, indeed, very peculiar, as far
1006
Mr. J. Foster
observed, that the duties alluded to were protecting duties for England as well as for Ireland; and expressed a difference of opinion from his right hon. friend with respect to the duty upon coals.
Mr. Ricardo
considered those duties injurious to Ireland as well as to England, especially in the intercourse between the two countries.
Mr. J. Foster
declared himself an advocate for the total removal of all obstacles to the commercial intercourse between England and Ireland. He thought that the custom-houses between the two countries should cease to exist—that the interchange of their productions and manufactures should be entirely uninterrupted—that, in a word, the passage across the Channel should be as free and unembarrassed as that from one town to another in either country. It was, indeed, most vexatious to think, that every man now passing from the one country to the other was liable to have, not only his portmanteau or trunks, but even his person and the clothes he were rigidly examined by custom-house officers. Such a system ought not to be allowed to exist.
The resolutions were then put and agreed to.
1007
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, June 9, 1820.
ROYAL MARRIAGE ACT.]
Lord Holland
rose to solicit their lordships attention to a notice which he wished to give for Monday next. It was his intention on that day to introduce a bill for the repeal of the 12th of George 3rd, commonly called the Royal Marriage act. He was aware that it was very irregular, in the mere notice of a motion, for him to state the reasons which induced him to bring forward the subject; but he hoped their lordships would indulge him while he briefly explained the grounds on which he thought it necessary to name so early a day as Monday for the consideration of so important a subject He chose that day because, exclusively of the many and forcible general reasons which induced him to wish to see that act expunged from the Statute-book, he hoped it might now be possible, that when the subject came to be considered in all its bearings, particularly with reference to the unfortunate difficulty in which the royal family was placed, it might suggest, to those better qualified than he was for such a task, some means by which a legislative measure divested of all penalties, and calculated to remove that difficulty, could be adopted, If such a proceeding should appear practicable, their lordships would be spared the necessity of directing the committee they had appointed to proceed with its painful duty on Tuesday, because, in the view he had taken of the subject, if a measure of the kind he had alluded to could be adopted, it would be one capable of relieving two illustrious persons from the painful situation in which they are placed, and would do so without any disparagement to the character or reputation of either. He therefore intended to bring the question under their lordships consideration next Monday. But in the mean time, should any thing occur which might render the necessity of his motion for the repeal of the Marriage act less pressing, he would think it right to post pone any deliberation upon it until another occasion. He wished further to ob; serve, that in adopting this course of proceeding he acted entirely on his own opinion. He would not say that he took that step altogether without the knowledge of others, because the habits of his life led him to communicate all he did to his friends; but he had acted without the
1008
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, June 9, 1820.
BANKRUPT LAWS.]
Mr. Finlay
said, that as he saw an hon. gentleman in his place, who had paid great attention to the present system of Bankrupt Laws, he would take the opportunity of asking him whether he intended to bring forward again the alterations which he thought it advisable should be made in them.
Mr. J. Smith
said, that it was his intention to persevere to a certain degree in the measures which he had proposed on a former occasion, and to bring forward either a bill or bills to correct the evils of the present system of the bankrupt laws. He was placed, however, in a situation which prevented him from bringing them forward at present. From a communication which he had received from the first legal authorities in the kingdom, he had learned that many of the evils to which he had called the attention of the House could be remedied by the authority of the lord-chancellor. He was likewise given to understand, that not only was that noble and learned personage willing to exercise that authority, but that he was even then engaged in drawing up the necessary orders to remedy them. He was well aware that the authority of that noble and learned personage could not remedy the whole of them; but he thought he should not be justified in bringing any specific plan before the House until he saw the orders of the noble lord, and the manner in which they met or avoided the present evils.
MOTION FOR A SECRET COMMITTEE ON THE PAPERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE QUEEN.]
Lord Castlereagh
rose for the purpose of moving that the order of the day for "referring the papers presented on Wednesday last to the House to a secret committee, to consider the matter thereof, and to report the same, with their observations thereupon, to the House," should be then read, in order to its being further adjourned till Monday next [Cries of Hear!]. In making that proposition to the House, he thought it right to state, that he made it in consequence of a proposition which had been received at a late hour that day
1009
Mr. Brougham
concurred with the noble lord in the import which he had given to his present motion. It was with a view to have matters kept for Monday in the same state as they were at present, or rather as they were on the last night of adjournment. To be explicit, he wished members to act as if every thing was in that state. He wished to add a few words regarding the delay which the noble lord seemed to insinuate to have taken place on his part. The noble lord had said, that certain propositions had not been received till so late an hour in the day that it was impossible to answer them before the meeting of the House. He would inform the noble lord of the reasons of that circumstance. The party from whom those propositions came thought it most important not to begin a negotiation, lest in beginning it she should appear to be making improper concessions, especially also as the other party, who did not commence any negotiation, stood in a situation not to be injured by making concessions. The strong and earnest remonstrances of her legal advisers had, however at a late hour in the day, overcome the reluctance which the illustrious individual in question felt to being the first to negociate [Hear!]; and he therefore trusted that the noble lord would feel convinced that there was no intention either on his part or on the part of his hon. and learned colleague, to take ministers by surprise in sending to the noble earl at a late hour in the day the communication which they had sent him [Hear, hear!].
Lord Castlereagh
disclaimed any intention of imputing improper delay to the hon. and learned gentleman or his client. He had merely mentioned the lateness of the hour at which the proposition had
1010
Mr. Brougham
said, that in the delicate situation in which both the noble lord and himself were placed, a superfluous was better than an imperfect explanation.
Mr. Wynn
observed, that one of the great advantages arising from the step which the House had taken on the night of the adjournment was this—that no one could suppose that the renewal of the negotiation, come from whichever party it might, was the result of any other feeling than a deference to the wishes of the House of Commons, re-echoed back to it as those wishes had been by every individual from one end of the country to the other [Cheers].
The order for taking the papers into consideration was then further adjourned till Monday.
NAVY ESTIMATES.
The navy estimates having, on the motion of sir George Warrender, been referred to a committee of supply, it was moved by him, "That a sum not exceeding 1,980,566
l.
s.
d.
l.
Sir M. W. Ridley
said, he had no objection to the grant, and admitted that a reduction to the amount of 114,000
l.
Sir G. Cockburn
explained the causes of the clerks not being raised to the rank of pursers. The number of them was considerable; and if the system of raising their rank was to continue, no end could be put to the number of persons who would require half-pay.
1011
Sir Joseph Yorke
observed, that nothing was more flat, stale, and unprofitable, than the generality of discussions in that House upon the expenditure of the public money, and especially with respect to the naval estimates of late years. His hon. friend who had just sat down, had stated that there was a reduction of 100,000
l.
l.
║
1012
l.
l.
1013
Sir T. B. Martin
defended the superannuation allowances alluded to by his hon. friend, and as to the convicts, he stated, that when these people were idle and unemployed, scenes of tumult and vice perpetually prevailed among them, while, through employment, they were rendered industrious and regular. An allowance of 3
d.
Mr. Hume
observed, that, from the statement of the estimates which he held in his hand, he could not see that the saving in the estimates this year was so large as was stated. He was at a loss to know how such a saving as had been mentioned could be shown. There was a reduction in the total amount of salaries, but this was overbalanced by the excess in the half-pay and superannuations. In the very large items for build-
1014
l.;
l.
l.
1015
l.
l.;
l.
l.;
l.;
l.;
l.
1016
l
Sir T. B. Martin
said, that since the peace, 374 ships of war had been sold, and 178 broken up—a reduction almost equal to the number now remaining. He thought that ministers were open to a charge directly contrary to that which had been urged by the hon. member, and that they had been too hasty in diminishing the strength of our navy. We had now a formidable fleet ready to go to sea at a
1017
Sir F. Ommanny
said, that such was the reduced state of the navy that he believed no naval officer in that House could go on board a common guard-ship and find men enough on board to man a boat in an officer-like manner. He thought the lords of the Admiralty had not discharged the duty which they owed to the country, in reducing the navy so low as they had done; and said, he was not one of those who believed that the continent was in such a state of security as to justify the dismantling of our army and navy.
Sir Isaac Coffin
said, that as an hon. and gallant officer had, for once, made an opposition speech, he would make a mi-material speech, and declare, that he thought his majesty's ministers had neglected nothing which could contribute to the happiness and security of the navy.
Mr. Tierney
hoped that the opposition speech which had been made on the other side the House would produce more effect than those which proceeded from the quarter in which he was standing; and he further hoped that the hon. member who made the opposition speech would follow up that measure by giving an opposition vote. If there were some branches of the naval service in which expenditure had been too profuse, there
1018
1019
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the statement just made by the right hon. gentleman could not but interest the feelings of the House. He could not agree, however, with the right lion, gentleman as to the expediency of extending the limits which it had been deemed expedient to apply to the granting of pensions. Pensions had increased to so great
1020
Sir M. Ridley
moved an amendment, that the grant should be reduced 2,000
l,
l.
Mr. Hume
asked if it was proper that a transport board should be kept up at Portsmouth, at the expense of 477
l.;
l.
l;
l.;
1021
Sir G. Warrender,
in reply to the first of the lion, gentleman's observations, observed, that Portsmouth and Cowes were necessary transport stations, as the embarkation of troops for foreign service generally took place at one of these ports, With respect to the remarks on the; charge for stationery, the excess under that head in the Victualling and Navy offices over the expense in the Admiralty office was occasioned by the greater number of ships' books, and other articles of the same description, which were required in the former. As far as he knew, however, no articles but such as were generally called stationery, were classed under that head.
Sir F. Ommaney
said, that if the hon. gentleman was acquainted with nautical matters, he would readily perceive that the necessity of having transport stations both at Portsmouth and at Cowes arose from the obvious circumstance, that the direction of the wind might be more favourable to embarkation at the one place than at the other.
l.
l.
Sir Joseph Yorke
took that opportunity of asking the chancellor of the exchequer, if sir Robert Seppings had yet received the pension which parliament had recommended last year—he meant, had sir Robert actually touched the cash? He needed not remind the committee that Mr. Harrison, who had been one of the secretaries to the Treasury, had stood precisely in the same situation as sir R. Seppings, and had received a sum of 5,000
l.
Sir T. B. Martin
bore testimony to the valuable saving of sir Robert Seppings. His services were beyond all pecuniary reward; and the benefit which the country had derived from those services, was incalculably greater than any sum which could be voted for them. He thought the pension had been too long delayed.
1022
Sir E. Harvey
said, that no officer in the civil department had ever done so much for the navy as sir R. Seppings.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that, upon its being considered that some further remuneration was due to this gentleman for the benefit which the navy had derived from his invention, a communication to that effect had been made to the Treasury by the first lord of the Admiralty. In consequence of that communication, it had been arranged that some provision should be made, by which his family would be benefitted, and he believed that this arrangement had since been carried into effect.
The resolution was then agreed to.
LOAN—WAYS AND MEANS]
The House having resolved itself into a committee of Ways and Means,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
stated, that he should not have occasion to trespass long on the attention of the committee, it having been generally understood, in consequence of a former arrangement, that he should defer any specific explanation of the finances of the present year until Friday next, when, on submitting to the House certain resolutions respecting the sinking fund and the loan, the supply, and the Ways and Means he would enter fully into the subject. All he had now to-do was, to state the terms of the loan that had been contracted for on the present day. In recommending its confirmation to parliament, he must observe that it was one of the most advantageous bargains ever concluded between the Treasury and the contractors. The price of stocks had this day coincided precisely with what it was when the loan was contracted for last year; and though last year there was an extraordinary degree of competition, the competition was still greater on the present occasion. The contract, in this instance, was a half per cent more favourable to the public than it was in the former year, although the price of the funds was in each case the same. The 3 per cent reduced annuities were now, as they were last year, at 69. The last price, before that stock was shut, was 70½ from which if they deducted the July dividend of 1½ per cent, it reduced it to 69, which was the present price—the same price even to a fraction, which the 3 per cent annuities bore last year. The contract for the loan of last year amounted to
1023
s.
l.
s.
s.
s.
l.
Mr. Grenfell
expressed his approbation of the loan, which was undoubtedly very Favourable to the public. It was always an evidence of a beneficial contract when the premium was moderate. The right hon. gentleman was however mistaken when he said, that this was the most favourable loan that had ever been concluded. Other loans had been more favourable, with reference to the existing prices of the funds when they were contracted for.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
did not mean to refer to the present loan as the most favourable that had ever been concluded; but undoubtedly he considered it to be one of the most favourable. He had no recollection of a higher relative price of the funds except in one former year.
Mr. Ricardo
observed, that the present loan was made on very satisfactory terms. It was impossible, he thought, that it could be obtained at a more favour-ablerate. He however traced those favourable terms to the recommendation of an bon. friend (Mr. Grenfell) who, some years ago, had advised that the commissioners of the national debt should be allowed to subscribe for the loan to the amount of the balances in their hands. This advice was followed on the present occasion; but if the old course had been adopted, and the loan had been for 17,000,000
l.,
1024
l.
l.
s.
s.
l.
1025
l;
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that, in the first place, he entirely con curred with the hon. member in applying the principle of competition to all con tracts for the public, wherever it could be safely introduced. There might, how ever, be cases where it would not be practicable to adopt the system. As a general principle it was a good one, and in a variety of instances it was adopted by government. With respect to the hon. member's remark relative to the advances made from the consolidated fund to the public service, the hon. member would understand the matter better by a reference to the 59th of Geo. 3rd, cap. 93, than from any explanation which he could give. He would, however, briefly answer the hon. member's observation. It had been a frequent complaint of different Members, in that House, that a great pro fit was made by the Bank, by holding in
1026
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.;
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.
Mr. Grenfell
said, the right hon. gentleman would, he was sure, recollect that, in the commencement of the session in February, 1819, a question arose during the. discussion, relative to the Bank balances, whether the sum of 18,000,000
l.
1027
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the 2,600,000
l.
Mr. J. Martin
said, that at several different quarters there were seven or eight millions due on the consolidated fund; and yet the right hon. gentleman stated that he borrowed from it. By the act of parliament he could not borrow unless there was a surplus, and therefore he conceived that the statute had been violated.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
denied that any violation of the act had taken place.
Mr. Hume
said, that the authority to borrow 6,000,000
l.
l.
1028
Mr. Grenfell
said, it would be a most desirable thing if some means were devised to get rid of this deficiency of the consolidated fund. One objection to its continuance was, that it rendered the accounts so extremely complex, that he doubted much whether the right hon. gentleman himself understood them. He did not say this with any intention to offend the right hon. gentleman; but he did most positively know that many persons in official situations in the exchequer declared that they could not master them. When such men as his hon. friends, who had spoken in the course of this discussion, and who were in the habit of inspecting figures and accounts, stated that these accounts were unintelligible to them, something ought to be done to simplify them. The deficiency of the consolidated fund was a blot on the statement of their annual finance. It was clear that there was a deficit of from six to eight millions: he knew that that deficiency was provided for quarterly by the Bank; but it should be recollected that they paid the Bank interest for it. If they even paid a little more interest than they did to the Bank, in order to procure money to cover it completely, it would be advantageous to the public, since it would simplify the system. But if they did not raise the money by loan, and chose rather to issue exchequer-bills, still they would not be paying a greater interest than they now paid to the Bank. He was not sanguine enough to contemplate the period, within any moderate lapse of time, when the increase of the resources of this country would enable them to get rid of this deficiency. If the right hon. gentleman could state that in two or three years such an improvement was likely to take place as would be adequate to the expenditure, and also get rid of the deficiency of seven or eight millions, he would not be averse to giving him the full time.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, there was one point which might account for the hon. gentleman's observations, which was, that he did not really understand the mode in which the sum of 2,600,000
l.
1029
l.
l.:
l.
l.
Mr. Ricardo
observed, that on the 5th of July, 1819, there was a deficiency of 8,400,000
l.
l.,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, if that sum had not been advanced from the consolidated fund, the difference would be, that the Bank would have 2,600,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
Mr. Grenfell
rose, and, adverting to the 12,000,000
l.
l.
l.,
1030
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Hume
understood the right hon. gentleman to have said, that he hoped this would be the last loan the country would require for a long time. But how could that be? Were these 12,000,000
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, in reply, that he feared there would be much confusion in the supposed simplification of proceedings which had been suggested by hon. gentlemen.
Mr. Alderman Heygate
believed, that during the war the loans would have been borrowed on worse terms if the public credit had not been kept up by the, sinking fund which had been established by Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox, and ought to be held sacred. No delusion could now prevail upon the subject; for if its nominal amount had been stated at 17 millions, all classes in the country knew that it only consisted of five. With respect to loans, their result was evident. The present he conceived to have been contracted for on terms disadvantageous to the public; for it was done in a stock, the, nominal price of which was at a discount, of 30 per cent, and that price itself 14 or 15 per cent lower than the stock which, might have been created three years ago. It was most important for every man in the country, in whatever trade or profession, to know how the circulating medium
1031
Mr. Ricardo
thought it quite unnecessary for the Bank of England to reduce its circulating medium any further than it? was at present reduced. The worthy alderman had said that gold was now at the Mint-price; perhaps he might have said that it was a little under it; for he knew that many persons took gold to the Mint at the. Mint-price, in order to have it coined; and this they could not do if gold was not, in fact, a little under that price, because some space, of time must, elapse
1032
l.;
l.
Mr. Hume
observed, that if the worthy alderman would refer to former cases, he would find, that upon occasions when the heaviest loans had been borrowed to the amount of 20,000,000
l.
l.
Mr. Alderman Heygate
denied that he ever intended to say that the circulating medium would be reduced to the full amount of the loan; but he was at a loss to know by what channels it would be poured in again upon the public. He should be most happy to find his fears groundless, and that the circulating medium would be kept up; in which case the industry and the revenue of the country might revive.
The resolution was then agreed to.
IRISH PROTECTING DUTIES.]
The report of the Protecting Duties (Act of
1033
Sir J. Newport
remarked, that some of the duties were extremely oppressive to Ireland and injurious to its commerce. Among the articles materially affected were those of books, pictures, and statues. The effect had almost extinguished the value of copy rights, and annihilated the trade of printing books. Through this, authors naturally sent their works to other parts of the empire; capital was in consequence withdrawn, and in proportion to the amount so withdrawn, the commerce of the country must be injured; he therefore wished the duties might be altogether repealed. The duty on coals was also most severely felt in many parts of the country; and was most injurious to the manufactures and to the poor. He wished these to be gradually diminished.
Sir H. Parnell
said, that in many cases that which was called a protecting duty was, in fact, a tax upon Ireland, particularly the duty of 10 per cent on British manufactured articles imported into Ireland.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he had listened with the greatest attention to the opinions expressed upon this topic from both sides of the House, and particularly from those gentlemen, who as representatives for Ireland were better able to understand the subject than he was. But he found so many jarring interests, and so many conflicting opinions, that he thought it better to take up the subject at a future day upon a general scale, than attempt to discuss minutely a point in which both opinions and interests were at variance. It was his most anxious wish to disembarrass the intercourse between both countries by the abolition of all impeding duties on both sides of the channel as soon as the state of the public revenue would permit. One of his first objects was, to open a free intercourse between the literature of both countries. Others would follow as they seemed most expedient and practicable; and he trusted that before the lapse of many years, those final arrangements so very desirable to every friend of both countries would be adopted.
Sir John Newport
begged leave to suggest that the most speedy and effectual means of promoting the commercial intercourse between both countries was, to begin by an annual reduction of one per cent on the Custom-house duties of ten per cent between both countries recipro-
1034
Sir H. Parnell
thought it would be of the highest importance to the interest of both countries to have the commerce of this country thrown open to the whole population of Ireland; and he should shortly call the attention of the House to the subject.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, June 12, 1820.
SECRET COMMITTEE ON THE PAPERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE QUEEN.]
The Earl of Liverpool
reminded their lordships of the order which had been made on Thursday, that the Secret Committee should not meet until to-morrow. He had made the motion for that order, not on any specific ground which could induce him to think it necessary, but upon hopes which appeared to be entertained by their lordships. Since that period communications and explanations had taken place on the subject. He was not prepared to say what might be the result of these communications and explanations, but the state of the business was certainly such as to make a farther adjournment of the meeting of the committee desirable. He, therefore, intended to propose that the day of meeting should be fixed for Saturday next. Before he sat down he thought it necessary to observe, that a fabricated account of the correspondence on this subject had appeared, in which the documents were most scandalously falsified, and converted into libels. It was an aggravation of this conduct that it must have been done by some persons who had seen the originals, and who therefore could not be ignorant of the fabrication. It was, however, bat justice to say, that no blame could be imputed to her majesty's legal advisers. They had very honourably and voluntarily communicated to his majesty's ministers that they were no parties to the publication, and that nobody could regret it more than they did. He concluded by moving that the meeting of the secret committee be postponed to Saturday next.
Lord Holland,
after what had passed, did not intend that day to present the bill of which he had given notice on Friday; and in rising now, he meant to do nothing
1035
The motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, June 12, 1820.
CORK HARBOUR BILL.]
Mr. Boswell
presented a petition from the ship owners and others of Ayrshire, earnestly entreating that the bill might not be passed into a law. The petition set forth, that the bill would impose an increased expense on coals imported from the county and neighbourhood of the petitioners; that there were already funds sufficient to meet the expenses; and that the proposed measure would affect the little commerce that remained between the coasts, most injuriously, especially the lime and coal trade.
Sir N. Calthurst
moved the second reading of the bill. He hoped there would be no objection to this motion as the me-
1036
Sir Isaac Coffin
declared himself to be an enemy to all jobs, and such he conceived this bill to be. The people of White haven and its neighbourhood had already taken the alarm, and entertained a strong dislike to the measure; a paper containing some powerful objections to the bill had been put into his hands, and unless those objections could be upset in the committee, he should continue to say "No" to the measure.
Mr. Curwen
said, he had a petition most respectably signed by several hundred of the inhabitants of Cork, against the measure. This petition he should shortly present. In the mean time, he wished to state that the people of Hull were against the bill. The competition in the trifling branch of trade which was carried on between Hull and the Irish coast, was at present so great, there was little or nothing to be got by it at present; and the bill would render matters still worse. For his part, he considered the principle of the bill so objectionable, that no alterations that could, be made in the committee could make it at all palateable. He would therefore move, "that the bill be read a second time on that day three months."
Sir N. Colthurst
entreated the hon. member not to take the sense of the House in that early stage of the bill. He hoped he would suffer it to go to a committee up stairs.
Sir James Graham
entered his solemn protest against the bill. From all that he had heard, and all that he had read, he was satisfied that the measure altogether was a most obnoxious and a most unjustifiable tax on the property and industry of those who had no right to pay it. He trusted it would be thoroughly sifted in the committee, and as he was anxious that it should be so sifted, he hoped his hon. friend (Mr. Curwen), would consent to withdraw his amendment.
Mr. Curwen
consented to withdraw his amendment. The bill was read a second time, and, on the, motion of Mr. Boswell, the petitions against it were referred to the committee up stairs.
PETITION OF W. A. BECKWITH COMPLAINING OF DAMAGES BY RIOT.]
Mr. Peter Moore
presented a petition from Mr. Andrew Beckwith, who complained that, in the year 1817, his windows had
1037
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said a few inaudible words, after which
The Speaker
observed, that though a petition, praying for pecuniary relief, ought to receive the sanction of the ministers of the Crown, yet that the rule should never be extended beyond' the strict necessity of the case; and here, though the hon. gentleman who presented the petition stated that he conceived that pecuniary aid was that which was required by this petition, yet the terms of the petition did not necessarily impose on the House so strict a construction [Hear, hear!].
Sir Francis Burdett
thought it extremely hard that the petitioner should be deprived of a remedy. The present evil arose out of the anomalous condition of the law. Persons were required to keep the peace, and were punished for not keeping it, though the government, by taking their arms from them, deprived them of the means of keeping it. It was the duty of government, while it punished men for not doing that which it disabled them from doing, to make up and provide a recompense for those losses, which were the consequences of their own new laws.
CALLINGTON ELECTION.]
Sir Charles Burrell
reported from the Committee appointed to try the merits of the Petition against the Callington Election reported,
1038
The deputy clerk of the Crown was ordered to attend to-morrow, to amend the return.
1039
GALWAY—RIGHT OF ELECTION.]
Sir J. Mackintosh
presented a petition from the inhabitants of the town of Galway, who complained of some abuses in the management of their corporation. He had no intention to found any motion on the petition at present, except to move that it do he on the table. He observed that the first sentence of the petition contained one of those lively expressions which, though so familiar to our neighbours, must always appear strange to the duller intellects of the inhabitants of Great Britain. The corporation was described as having been "incorporated by prescription."—Ordered to he on the table.
SECRET COMMITTEE ON THE PAPERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE QUEEN.]
Lord Castlereagh
said: I rise for the purpose of moving the order of the day for the further consideration of his majesty's message, with a view to its postponement until Friday next. In moving this adjournment, I trust the House will feel that it would be unbecoming in me to state any thing that has passed during the discussion, or to say a single word, as on the former occasion, as to the situation in which matters now stand. But I entreat hon. gentlemen to keep themselves and their impressions on the subject precisely in the same state, until a full explanation shall be given as to the position in which the great question may ultimately stand. In proposing to the House Friday next for the postponement of the order of the day, I mention it as the most convenient day. On Thursday his majesty's birth will be celebrated, and it has been usual for the House to adjourn upon that occasion, and I would rather take a later than an earlier period for the further discussion of this important matter. These successive adjournments ought to be viewed, not only as satisfactory to the House, but as material to the public interest, in order that the real state of the question may be made known as early as possible. Before I sit down, I have to beg the noble lord (J. Russell), further to defer the discussion of a question in which he is particularly concerned: any other day would be more convenient than the present, as it will be the duty of his majesty's servants to be in deliberation in the course of the evening. If the discussion to which I refer should be now brought on, I must therefore retire from it.
1040
Sir M. W. Ridley
said:—I rise to express the anxious hope I entertain that every individual, in the House and out of the-House, will so far forward the views of the noble lord, as rigidly to abstain from injuring the cause of either of the illustrious parties, or of the nation at large, by giving publicity to any documents or any correspondence, whether genuine or garbled, which may by possibility fall into their hands. I am sure that I need only mention the circumstance to the House; for every gentleman who hears me will be immediately convinced of the danger that must inevitably arise, from publications which can have only one effect, however unintentional—that of exciting prejudice against one party or the other.
Mr. Brougham
said:—I heartily concur in the recommendation of the noble lord, and of my hon. friend who last- spoke, in wishing to abstain from saying one word upon the progress of these transactions. I rise only to express my entire concurrence more particularly in the latter part of the worthy baronet's observations, and to make my most positive assertion, if is be required, that neither the illustrious personage for whom we are concerned, nor her legal advisers, entertain any other sentiment. It is our sincere desire that every thing should be concealed, or known only to the illustrious personage, and to us three, her majesty's legal advisers. If any other disclosure have taken place (though I have seen nothing disclosed, because I have seen nothing the least like the real state of the facts), it can only have been produced by some incredible degree of indiscretion or breach of confidence, for which no blame is attributable to my learned colleagues or myself, nor to the illustrious personage for whom we act; but it must in fairness be in part ascribed to a circumstance, I am sure, as unprecedented as all the rest of these transactions—that her majesty is placed in a situation which renders it difficult to prevent the access of indiscreet persons [Cheers].
Lord Castlereagh.
—In the spirit of what has been just said, I may add, that this is a question on which all parties ought to say as little as possible; and I cannot give the House a stronger pledge of my feeling regarding it, than the determination I evinced to pass it over on the present occasion in complete silence. I am happy to hear what has been so properly stated by the hon. baronet and confirmed by the
1041
Mr. Brougham.
—I meant nothing, I can assure the House, offensive to any quarter, because I know that offers have I been made to her majesty which would have enabled her majesty to be better; accommodated—pecuniary offers to an unlimited amount, that the queen might be provided for in a much more suitable style. Thus many of the chances of disclosure to which I alluded might have been removed; but accidently her majesty was placed in a situation which rendered it more difficult, as I said, to prevent the access of indiscreet persons.
The motion was then agreed to.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS BILL.]
On the motion of lord Althorp, this bill was recommitted.
Mr. Bright
proposed a clause for extending the benefit of the measure to Crown-debtors, as well as to other insolvent persons. He could not imagine any good reason why the former should be placed in a worse situation than the latter, or why the Crown should exercise the power of confining the person of its debtor, after he no longer possessed any property. He should therefore submit a clause, exempting Crown-debtors from; imprisonment, after a full disclosure, and a discharge of all claims beyond the sum of 200
l.
The Attorney General
was surprised that his hon. and learned friend should wish to discontinue a provision which had appeared in all former acts of this nature. Some cases ought at least to have been mentioned, as actually proving inconvenience to have arisen from the former state of the law. Had the commissioners, in the exercise of their discretion, ever been known to refuse indulgence to an honest man? If the law were altered, as it now applied to smugglers, be would venture to state, that the revenue would be defrauded with impunity, as it often happened that when the smuggler himself was not a man of property, individuals on the other side of the water would pay down sums of 700
l.
l.
Mr. Bright
said, there were two descriptions of Crown debtors; one indebted
1042
The proposition was withdrawn.
PETITION FROM COVENTRY COMPLAINING OF EXCISE PROSECUTIONS FOR SELLING ROASTED WHEAT.]
Mr. Creevey
presented a petition from certain inhabitants of the city of Coventry, sellers of Roasted Wheat; setting forth,
1043
The petition was ordered to he on the table, and to be printed.
1044
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, June 13, 1820.
SCOTCH PEERS.]
The Earl of Roseberry
rose to move the second reading of the bill for regulating the right of voting at the election of peers to represent the peerage of Scotland. He observed, that neither in the acts of parliament relative to the election of Scotch peers, nor in any of the resolutions come to at different times on that subject by their lordships, was there any provision for the evil which the present bill was meant to prevent. The object of the bill was, to guard against cases of unqualified persons assuming the right of voting, there being no power to reject their votes at the time. He appealed to noble lords who knew the practice, whether it was not the fact, that scarcely an election occurred in which persons did not vote, who, in the opinion of every one present, were not entitled to give their suffrages. It was proposed by the bill to exclude from voting (with some exceptions) all persons who claimed as succeeding to deceased peers, until they had made out their titles. This would prevent the intrusion of individuals, who, from vanity or worse motives, often interfered in those elections. The right of petition and redress would, of course, be open to those who might consider themselves wronged. The inconveniences of which he had spoken would not occur at the election for the peers of Scotland, if the same provision had been made respecting them as exists with regard to the Irish peers. No Irish peer, not even the direct descendant of a deceased peer, is allowed to vote at the election of a peer to sit in that House, until he has folly made out his title. He did not mean to interfere with the claim to vote where the right was obviously undoubted. The bill, therefore, as far as regarded direct descendants, left the practice as it now stood, and only required collateral descendants to make out their titles.
Earl Cathcart
thought that the object which the noble lord had in view might be more conveniently obtained by a resolution of the House. He concurred, however, in the necessity of some regulation being applied to the practice which at present prevailed.
Lord Melville
did not oppose the bill, which, under all the circumstances connected with the elections of Scotch peers, was, he thought, entitled to their lord-
1045
The Earl of Lauderdale
approved of the object of the bill. Such was the practice at the election of Scotch peers, that he could at any time procure fifteen or sixteen votes, which would be good for the time, though protested against. He did not think it competent to the House to attain the object of the bill by a resolution. He believed it would not be necessary to insert the word brothers in the bill, as the brother of a peer must be also the son of a peer. As Scotch peers could not be created, it followed that the brother would be the son of a peer. It could not be otherwise, unless the deceased peer had succeeded collateral. He was fully of opinion that peers should make out their claim before they assumed the right of voting; but there was another class of claimants besides those to which the bill applied. Against two claimants of this description the House had passed a resolution, directing the clerk register not to receive their votes until they made out their claims. He should, perhaps, on a future occasion, propose a resolution that no person should vote until they had made good their titles.
Lord Melville,
in explanation, observed, that the clause in the bill excepted the sons and grandsons of peers; but he still thought that brothers ought also to be excepted, because it might happen, from collateral succession, that the brother of a deceased peer was not the son of a peer.
The Lord Chancellor
approved of the bill. The provision in the law respecting Irish peers was extremely salutary, and be thought it might be properly extended to the Scotch. An English peer must have a writ before he appears to take his seat in that House. It was also necessary to prove that he was the legitimate son of his father, to whom he succeeded; and, in cases in which there could not be the slightest doubt, this proof often required
1046
The Earl of Lauderdale
remarked, that such proof was not necessary in Scotland, from the nature of the law respecting marriage.
The Lord Chancellor
was aware that there were many modes of contracting marriage in Scotland. He had heard, he believed, three or four hundred ways pointed out by counsel at their lordships bar, who descanted on the subjects as learnedly as if they had had three or four hundred wives themselves.
The bill was then read a second time.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, June 13, 1820.
BANK OF ENGLAND ACCOUNTS.]
Mr. Grenfell,
in moving for the printing of certain Bank of England accounts of the public balances, presented yesterday, said, that as there were possibly some members in that very select House, who were not members of the last parliament, and but little conversant with the subject, he begged leave to make one or two observations. Now that the principles, arrangements, and regulations, for which he had so strenuously contended, in common with other members, in the last parliament, were recognized and adopted, he trusted the warfare between the Bank of England and himself was over. When he said warfare, he used that word only in a political sense, for no feeling had ever entered his breast which was not founded upon public and political principles; he had never wished to interfere with the private transactions of the Bank of England, or to suggest any thing contrary to those principles of justice, liberality, and good faith which ought to regulate all transactions between that corporation and the public. It had been proved by documents for which he had at different times moved, that during a period of from ten to twelve years, the corporation of the Bank had been in undisturbed possession of public money, amounting upon aft average to a sum of eleven or twelve millions sterling. The interest upon that sum amounted to 575,000
l.
1047
l.
l.
l.
l.
1048
l.
Mr. Peirse
said, that the hon. gentleman appeared to have forgotten the great advantages which the public had derived from the Bank in consequence of the advance of large sums of money without interest, or at very low interest. The balance of eleven millions and a half, to which the hon. gentleman had alluded, had been gradually reduced the year after to eight, seven, six, and at length to three millions and a half. In one transaction with the public, he alluded to the issuing of tokens, the Bank had lost no less than 700,000/. In the loan of three millions advanced by the Bank at three per cent, taking the difference between the current interest of five per cent, and that rate of interest, the advantage to the public was not less than 60,000/. a-year. He adverted to a letter of the late Mr. Perceval, in which that gentleman expressed the highest satisfaction at the liberal disposition of the court of directors. The whole annual sum which the Bank received from government, and out of which they had to pay all the expenses attendant on the management of the public business, was only 262,000
l.
Mr. Grenfell,
in explanation, maintained, that within the last twenty-two years
1049
l.
l.
Mr. Wilson
denied that, because when the Bank possessed large balances of the public money they were enabled to make considerable profits from them, it followed that those profits were a loss to the public. The risk they ran, the extensive buildings they erected, and other considerations of a similar nature, entitled them to adequate remuneration. He was persuaded that the advantages enjoyed by any private banking-house were as great, and in some instances greater, than the advantages enjoyed by the Bank; and he was also convinced, from all he had observed, that the Bank were as anxious for the public good as for their own.
Mr. Ricardo
conceived, that if it were true, as had been stated, that the Bank had made no larger profits in consequence of its connexion with government, and its retaining these balances than any private concern which might have held them would have made, it must have managed its own affairs very badly. The hon. director bad mentioned, as one of the great advantages which had accrued to the public from the acts of the Bank, the lending of a sum of money, without interest, to the government. But the thing was differently represented by the court of directors at the time. The Bank was then in this situation:—it had been allowed to increase the amount of its capital, instead of dividing a larger amount of profits among the proprietors—that is, instead of making a larger dividend it had been permitted to add to its capital: and the understanding was, that the loan of 3,000,000
l.
1050
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, June 14, 1820.
MOTION RESPECTING BILLS FOR THE REGULATION OE TRADE.]
Mr. Serjeant Onslow
rose, pursuant to notice, to propose that the House should adopt a new Standing Order, declaring that no bill for altering the regulations of any particular trade should be read a first time in that House until such bill had the sanction of the report of a select committee. He briefly set forth the advantages to be expected from adopting this proposition, and stated the chamber of commerce at Birmingham to have voted a petition praying for the adoption of such an arrangement. He then moved, "That no Bill regulating the conduct of any Trade, altering the Laws of Apprenticeship in relation to any particular business, affixing marks to designate the quality of any manufacture, prohibiting the manufacture of any species of commodity, or extending the term of any patent, shall be read a first time in this House, until a Select Committee shall have inquired into the expediency or inexpediency of the proposed regulations, and shall have reported to the House the result of such inquiries."
Mr. Mansfield
opposed the motion. The present moment was, he observed, a most unfavourable one for the introduction of such a measure—a moment when petitions were coming in from all quarters, complaining of distress, and praying for relief from the operation of certain restrictions affecting trade. If the House should entertain the motion, he hoped it would not be allowed to have a retrospective effect. But he looked upon the appointment of a committee for the introduction of a bill regulating trade, in some instances as vexatious, and causing unnecessary delay. If, therefore, the House would go with him, he would move the previous question.
Mr. Baring
would not support the motion if he conceived it calculated to throw any obstacle in the way of any petitioners to that House; but, if he understood the object of the hon. and learned gentleman, it was to procure more attention to bills
1051
Mr. Littleton
was glad to find such a measure introduced. It was not an uncommon thing to find bills passed in one session relating to trade?, without consulting those parties most interested, which it was found necessary to repeal in the next, in consequence of representations of their bad effects. If this measure was calculated to injure trade, how came it to have been prayed for by the chamber of commerce of Birmingham?
Mr. Creevey,
though he would offer no observation upon the merits of the proposed order, yet, considering that a standing order was a most important subject, he did not wish to see it passed without due consideration.
Mr. Serjeant Onslow
replied, that he had given notice of such a measure as this in the last session of the last parliament. The hon. member could not therefore say that the House were at all taken by surprise on this occasion. His object was for the benefit of those engaged in trade.
Mr. Western
conceived that the question was one of serious consideration, and ought to be sent to a committee.
Lord Althorp
thought that the proposed order would be a good one; but he agreed in the suggestion of sending it for consideration to a committee.
Mr. Serjeant Onslow
said, he had no objection to refer the matter to a committee, if the House thought proper.
The motion was then withdrawn, and a select committee was appointed to consider the propriety of a standing order such as the learned gentleman had moved for.
IRISH PAUPERS BILL.]
Mr. Parnell
called the attention of the House to the distressing situation in which Irish paupers were placed by the practice of removing them from this country to any part of the, Irish coast. He proceeded to suggest a plan, by which he thought the evils to which those unfortunate persons were, exposed might be in a great degree remedied. He wished specific places to be named to which they were to be sent—notice to be given of their coming, and arrangements made for their reception when they arrived at the place of their destina-
1052
Mr. S. Bourne
did not mean to oppose the motion, as he had no objection to make the poor-laws more perfect than they were at present. The hon. member had, however, fallen into some mistakes. The Irish poor might obtain settlements by service, or by holding tenements of a certain rent. If greater facilities were not afforded to them for gaining settlements in this country, it must be admitted that it was no fault of his, as he had been disposed to bring in a bill that would have effected this, but the proposition had not met with the approbation of the House. He said, he knew of no law that authorised the arrest of a man in this country for being a pauper, and it was new to him to hear of carrying paupers to their home described to be transportation.
Mr. Curwen
said, that no man could be removed from this country till after he had been examined before a magistrate. He, however, agreed that the Irish poor were at present exposed to great hardships, and was glad to hear a measure proposed, that had for its object the diminution of the evil.
Mr. C. Grant
thought the subject one which merited inquiry.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
SPECIFICATIONS OF PATENTS.]
Mr. Wrottesley
moved for leave to bring in>g bill to prevent the inconvenience arising from the too great facility of procuring copies of the specifications of Patents, enrolled by grantees of letters patent, for the sole and exclusive vending of manufactures within this realm.
Mr. Hume
observed, that the motion was contrary to all sound and liberal views of commercial policy, and that instead of concealing the specifications, of patents, every possible facility ought the to given to render them public. The legislature ought never to lend it self to any measure which was calculated to prevent the diffusion of knowledge.
Mr. Wrottesley
said, that the object of his motion was not substantially to interfere with the facilities of examining specifications, but to Introduce such a modification of them as would limit the privilege of examination to such persons as were
1053
The motion was agreed to.
IRISH BANK FAILURES.]
Colonel Bagwell
felt it his duty to call the attention of ministers and of the House to a calamity, greater, perhaps, than had ever fallen on any country before. Of fourteen banks in the South of Ireland, no fewer than eleven had stopped payment. The consequences were dreadful to contemplate, as the people were now absolutely reduced to a state of starvation. The food which the country people had been in the habit of bringing into the towns was now quite withdrawn. No supplies could therefore be obtained; for as no circulating medium remained, the country people knew that if they brought any food into the towns it must be seized upon by the populace without payment, as no means of paying were in their possession. He begged in the strongest manner to call on the chancellor of the exchequer, as he valued the very existence of a considerable portion of the population of Ireland, to give his attention to this subject, in the hope that he might elicit something from him of a consolatory nature, which might, in this most pressing emergency, be forwarded to Ireland by that day's post. He hoped he should hear from the right hon. gentleman not only that government were disposed to do something, but that measures had already been adopted to mitigate the evil.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
deeply regretted the distress to which the hon. gentleman had called his attention, but could not give that answer which he had desired to obtain. He was sure the House would feel the painful situation in which government was placed on the present occasion. To interfere in such cases was always a matter of great difficulty, and though the attention of government had been directed to the distress now felt in the South of Ireland, he was not prepared to give what the hon. member might consider a satisfactory answer.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
felt the deepest regret at the answer which the hon. member had just received from the chancellor of the exchequer. He concurred with the right hon. gentleman in admitting that extreme caution was necessary in such cases; he knew that interference on the part of parliament on such occasions was seldom thought advisable, and did not know that it had ever been called for on behalf of
1054
MR. GRATTAN—NEW WRIT FOR DUBLIN.]
Sir James Mackintosh
rose to move, that the Speaker should issue his writ for the election of a citizen to serve in parliament for the city of Dublin, in room of the right hon. Henry Grattan, deceased. In the absence of his right hon. friend, the member for Waterford, who from some circumstances, found it impossible to attend, he had been requested to address a few words to the Chair on this most melancholy occasion. He could assure the House, that in acceding to the request which had been made to him, he felt the deepest sense of his own inability to do justice to that immortal name which must connect itself with all that he had to say, and he could with equal truth assure them, that by acceding to it on this occasion he by no means evinced a partiality for such proceedings in general. Far from approving of such a course being pursued in cases of an ordinary description, he was ready to admit that if the practice were extended beyond the very narrow limits within which it had been of late years con6ned—if friendship, or any other inadequate cause, should make such addresses degenerate into matters of course, he should most sincerely deplore the departure from our recent custom, and heartily wish to return to the modest silence of our forefathers. Indeed studied panegyric on the dead was not consistent with the general character and simple habits of Englishmen; it was a practice rather suited to an enslaved people than to a land of freemen, for those who were debarred from the manly exercises open to the natives of this country, and restrained to a few subjects might be expcted, in the absence of other themes on which they might dilate, to exhaust themselves in laboured orations and in worthless praise; Hitherto, in modern times, the House had preserved a very becoming temperament on these subjects, and such tributes had been limited to cases of recent death, where warm respect, admiration, and af-
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
"Ne'er to those chambers where the mighty rest,
"Since their foundation came a nobler guest;
"Nor e'er was to the bowers of bliss convey'd,
"A purer spirit, or more welcome shade."
Lord Castlereagh,
agreeing with the remarks made by the hon. and, learned gentleman, as to the occasions on which a public tribute of applause should be rendered to those who were no more, perfectly entered into the feelings which had been expressed with respect to Mr. Grattan, and thought no individual could hesitate in awarding to his name the honours claimed for it. No man had ever rendered more splendid services to the country, than the individual whose loss was deplored both by the House and the country. He could remember when he (lord C.) first came into public life in 1790, that Mr. Grattan was there in the zenith of his talents, and certainly no talents had ever asserted greater supremacy over a popular assembly than his had done. He was of opinion, that in the great transaction which had been alluded to, England profited not less from the talents of Mr. Grattan than Ireland had done. By the victory which he bad previously gained, Mr. Grattan had laid the foundation for that measure which had united the two islands of Great Britain and Ireland into one empire, and dissipated those mists which had before prevented both countries from seeing their true interests, Mr. Grat-
1061
Mr. C. Grant
entreated the pardon of the House for occupying their attention for a few minutes on a subject which to him was so deeply interesting. He was glad that this occasion had not been allowed to pass, without paying that just tribute of panegyric to the memory of the late Mr. Grattan, because he thought it was due to the feelings of the House
1062
Mr. Wilberforce
observed, that the great public services which had been rendered both to Ireland and to Great Britain by the eminent and lamented individual in question, had been well described by his hon. and learned friend. Having witnessed all the exertions of Mr. Grattan's political life, after his introduction into this country, he begged to be allowed to say a single word on the subject. He had never known a man whose patriotism and love for the constitution of his country seemed so completely to extinguish all private interests, and to induce him to look invariably and exclusively to the public good. His mind was of a character which enabled him completely to triumph over party feeling on all, questions of great public importances—He could not abstain from remarking,
1063
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
trusted he might be permitted to occupy the House for a few moments, with the expression of those sentiments which were common to all who had ever known the revered individual whose loss the country had now to deplore. He was fully sensible that whatever might be said on the subject, might do honour to themselves and to the country; but could add no honour to the memory of such a man as Mr. Grattan. The hon. and learned gentleman who had introduced the topic to the House, had expatiated on the character of his illustrious friend with an eloquence and a feeling to which every breast responded. It had been truly said by the hon. and learned gentleman, that if they wished to read the history of M. Grattan, they must read the history of his country. With every memorable occurrence in Irish history during the last forty years, Mr. Grattan's name was connected; and he had stamped it with his character. It was superfluous to dilate on this subject. To Mr. Grattan's exertions, Ireland principally owed her independence. In his own words, the revolution then achieved was "alone in the history of empires, the revolution accomplished without shedding a drop of human
1064
Mr. Becher
declared his conviction that the House would make allowance for the feelings which must animate every Irish bosom on contemplating the qualities of the most distinguished and useful patriot that his country had ever produced. Without stopping for a moment to consider his own incapacity to address the House on such a subject, he should be ashamed to sit silently in any assembly where he had a right to deliver his sentiments, when the name, of Grattan was mentioned; and he was sure that his sentiments were in unison with those of all who heard him, when he expressed his deep lamentation for the loss, and his profound veneration and gratitude for the services of the illustrious individual in question. He by no means intended to enter into any detailed panegyric on
1065
1066
The motion was then agreed to.
IRISH TEN PER CENT UNION DUTIES.]—
Sir H. Parnell
said he rose to move for the appointment of a select committee, to inquire into the duties payable by the Act of Union, of ten per cent on British manufactures imported into Ireland, and on Irish manufactures imported into England. Such a committee was necessary, in consequence of the chancellor of the exchequer having brought in a bill to continue these duties for twenty years longer than the time prescribed by the Act of Union. This bill would seriously affect the interests of the British manufacturers, because it would continue a heavy tax upon their goods, and thereby diminish the demand for them in Ireland. It would also, by continuing this tax, injure the Irish consumers. The cause of distress in the manufacturing districts being a want of market, it was obvious, that this measure would be a great evil, by its effect in raising prices to the Irish consumer, and thus limiting the quantity he could otherwise purchase. If the import of English manufactures into Ireland was quite free, the use of them would be greatly extended; at present every one in Ireland paid twenty or thirty percent more for every article of manufacture than he would pay if there was no duty upon it; and 200,000
l.
1067
l.
1068
l.
1069
Mr. Littleton
seconded the motion. He thought it was of the utmost importance that this subject should be investigated by a committee of that House. There were many branches of trade, which were exclusively confined to this country; for instance, the wrought iron, the Hardware and the potteries. Now, it would be of infinite advantage to the starving manufacturers, if the duties on those branches of our trade were removed in our intercourse with Ireland.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
rose to oppose the motion. There was no one proposition, he said, which would produce a feeling half so fatal in Ireland as that of the hon. baronet. The state of Ireland at the pre sent moment was so deplorable, that any attempt to agitate this question would produce a feeling of a most distressing nature throughout the whole country; and he had not heard in the arguments of either of the hon. members any thing to induce him to agree to the motion. The hon. baronet said, that there, were many articles in schedule 2, which were not ma nufactured in Ireland; and he asked for a committee to inquire into that subject, forgetting, that the discussion on that point will come on in. the committee on the bill itself. The hon. baronet seemed to suppose, that the whole of the commodity of wrought iron was produced from England alone. There were, however, manufactories for that article in Ireland, and, although they might not perhaps appear considerable to the hon. member for Staffordshire, they were of great importance to the Irish people. He protested against the hon. baronet's construction of the union act. He contended that it was not intended by that act that these duties should cease at the end of twenty years; but at that time it should be competent for parliament to re-consider the subject. It was to prevent their going into an inquiry from which no good could be de rived, and to prevent the mischief which such a step would produce in Ireland in its present distressed state, that he objected to the motion.
Lord Althorp
supported the motion. He thought it a sure proof that the chancellor of the exchequer had introduced this measure in a careless manner, when it ap-
1070
Mr. Williams
thought it was right to continue the protecting duties, when it appeared that manufactories were founded on the faith of them as existing laws; but he did not think it just that Ireland should pay a duty of 10 per cent for necessary commodities.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
begged leave to bring to the recollection of the House the nature of the proceedings which had already taken place on this subject. In the session before last it had been stated in the House, that a petition was coming over from Ireland, praying for a continuance of these protecting duties. On this occasion, he had been asked what were the intentions of government respecting them? when he replied, that government was clearly of opinion that they must cease some time or other, but that they had not then fixed the period for their abolition. Upon farther consideration of the subject, he had plainly foreseen that they could not cease without adequate notice being given, without causing great injury, and he had therefore brought in, his bill with respect to them, which had beep alluded to. He declared that he could not consent now to go an inquiry, which could do no good, and. would only serve to create alarm. If the House had thought it necessary, they might have allowed these duties to continue in their present state for one or two years longer, and then take them again into consideration, with a view to appoint a time for their final extinction. But even that course could not be adopted without great disadvantage; for so long as the manufacturer saw no specific mode pointed, out for the extinction of these duties, he would be inclined to think that they would continue for ever. He could not agree in the opinion of the hon. baronet that the plan was not an intelligible one. It had been approved by three gentlemen of considerable experience in the affairs of Ireland, who had filled the office of chancellor of the exchequer for that country. The measure was intended to benefit the nation at large. With respect to the articles referred to by the hon.
1071
Mr. Curwen
was for going into the inquiry, not for the purpose of repealing the existing duties, but with a view to ascertain the period to which it would be necessary to continue them.
Sir N. Colthurst
hoped the chancellor of the exchequer would not accede to the motion. He knew it would be productive of considerable alarm and discontent in that part of the country with which he was connected. At a period like the present, when the public distresses of Ireland were so great from recent failures, it was of the utmost importance to avoid all subject of discontent or alarm.
Lord Castlereagh
said, that by the act of Union, the question of continuing or discontinuing these duties, was left entirely open. Now that parliament had evinced a disposition to act upon more enlarged principles of commerce, perhaps, if he had to consider whether he would for the first time propose such duties, he should not be willing to advise the adoption of them. But here they had to deal with duties already in existence; and even so, he would have no objection to go into an inquiry upon them, if it could be got through in the present session. But that was impossible. The argument of the hon. baronet, besides, applied only to two or three articles, whereas, the alarm which would be excited applied to the whole: and there never was a moment when it was more necessary to guard that country from all unnecessary alarm than the present, when commercial credit was so deeply shaken. No course could more directly tend to excite alarm than the course now proposed. With other injurious consequences it would produce a great deal of commercial jealousy.
Mr. Hume
said, that there were at least thirty or forty articles on which the duties might be modified. The intercourse between Ireland and England, would only be of real benefit to the latter country, when that intercourse should be free. It was from this freedom of intercourse established between England and Scotland that the latter had benefitted so materially since the union. As to the failures of the banks in Ireland, they really had
1072
Mr. W. Parnell
supported the motion.
Mr. Shaw
thought the hon. baronet had mistaken the opinions of the manufacturers in Ireland, at least sin Dublin, if he supposed that they did not feel great anxiety that the protecting duties should be continued. At the same time, he admitted that there were some articles on which the duties ought to be discontinued; but he was of opinion that they should be discontinued only according to the scale of gradual reduction which had' been proposed by his right hon. friend.
General Hart
opposed the committee, on the ground of there not being time for the inquiry in the present session.
Sir H. Parnell
briefly replied. He said, that as a great difference of opinion existed, he should feel it to be his duty to take the sense of the House. He felt persuaded that the right hon. gentleman himself was disposed to make some alteration. He was convinced, that if a committee was appointed, they would, in eight or ten days, be enabled to make a' report, which might lead to a beneficial measure.
The House divided: Ayes, 30; Noes, 66.—Majority against the motion 36.
List of the Minority.
Aubrey, sir John
Martin, John
Gurwen, J.C.
Monck, J. B.
Calcraft, J. jun.
Milton, viscount
Chetwynd, G.
Nugent, lord
Davies, col.
Parnell, Wm.
Ebrington, viscount
Palmer, col.
Guise, sir W.
Ricardo, David.
Griffith, J. W.
Robinson, sir G.
Gurney, R. H.
Smith, Wm.
Hart, G. V.
Stewart, sir J.
Harbord, hon. E.
Webb, E.
Hamilton, lord A.
Wilmot, R. J.
Heathcote, J. G.
Wood, alderman
Hume, J.
TELLERS.
Knox, hon. T.
Parnell, sir H.
Littleton, E.
Althorp, lord
MUTINY BILL]
Lord Palmerston
moved the third reading of the Mutiny bill.
Lord Nugent
wished to preface the observations he had to make in bringing forward the motion of which he had given notice, and which had for its object a diminution in the proposed amount of our military
1073
Lord Palmerston
thought this question would be best answered by the resolution itself, which he therefore moved should be then read.
The resolution was accordingly read, and it in distinct terms declared a vote of 92,224 men, exclusive of his majesty's forces in the East Indies.
Lord Nugent
assured the House that it was far from his intention to detain them long in setting forth the grounds upon which he thought it his duty to submit his present proposition. He feared, indeed, that the motives by which he was actuated, and the principles to which he must of necessity refer, would make but a slight impression on the House. His proposition would certainly apply itself at once to the principle of the army estimates, and have no connexion with any of their details. The time and patience of the House would be wasted, if he were to indulge in declamation at the cool unhesitating manner in which so great a military establishment had been proposed at a moment of profound peace. He trusted that the jealousy manifested on former occasions by parliament, with reference to a standing army, had not gone entirely out of fashion. It would be melancholy, indeed, if such a change had taken place in the feelings and dispositions of the country. A. much better defence, he felt assured, might be relied on for our domestic peace than an immense regular army. Such a force, viewed with regard to the avowed purposes of its application, seemed, to his mind, worse than useless. Were they to be told by the ministers of the Crown that after five years of peace, and after all the provisions made with regard to the militia, and the additions made to the yeomanry, that any cause of dismay or alarm could justify the maintenance of so enormous an establishment? Such a measure was, in appearance at least, a large stride towards a military government. He looked in vain to any thing which had fallen from the noble secretary at war for an argument to justify this proceeding. All that the noble lord had urged was the notoriety of its necessity. For his own part, he meant not to impute any motives of a personal kind; but he must observe, that a plea of this nature was easily
1074
1075
1076
Mr. Bright
said, he could not, without considerable alarm, view the efforts that were making to increase the military force of the country, and he deeply regretted the diminution of that bulwark of their strength—the naval force—which had been so often and so successfully employed in asserting the rights of Great-Britain. It was his most anxious desire to place the military force within the smallest possible compass. The establishment of 1792 had been referred to by former committees of that House as sufficiently large for the service of the country in times of perfect peace; and, for his own part, he could not see anything in the situation of the country at present that called on them to extend the military force beyond what it was in 1792. It was true that discontent existed in the country—it was true that alarming scenes had been exhibited—ie was most true, that meetings had been assembled, whether legally or illegally he would not determine, but which, in the minds of the people, were undoubtedly considered legal. It was equally true that those who were thus assembled had been forcibly dispersed; but he demanded of the House whether these combined circumstances rendered this extraordinary establishment necessary? He believed, notwithstanding all that was re-
1077
1078
Lord Palmerston
said, the noble lord, in the course of his speech, had stated, that the motion he was about to propose, and some of the sentiments he was about to profess, would not, he feared, coincide with the feelings of many individuals in that House. After having heard the motion of the noble lord, and the accusations he had advanced against gentlemen on the ministerial side of the House, he believed it would be found that there were indeed very few individuals within those walls who would be disposed to concur with the noble lord in the view he had taken of the subject. The noble lord's argument might be divided into two parts; the one relating to the military establishment, setting aside the 11,000 veterans; the other respecting the measure adopted in calling them out. The noble lord said, that ministers had adduced no reason to prove why, in the present instance, an establishment founded on that of 1792 would not be sufficient; and he further observed, that a committee, in the year 1817, which certainly was one of commotion, had pointed out the establishment of 1792 as that which ought to be
1079
1080
1081
1082
Colonel Davies
said, that he had been long of opinion that the country suffered under a military force, which it did not require, and that in the different departments of the army there was a shameful waste of expenditure. The hon. colonel next adverted to the public meetings held through the country, which were not, in the opinion of those who attended them, of an illegal description, and did not, at all events, require an increase of the army; for if the peace of the country were seriously threatened, he would much sooner depend upon the exertions of the gentry and the loyal and well-disposed part of the people, by far the most numerous body, than he would upon the dangerous and unconstitutional interference of military power. The actual force in 1819 was equal to all purposes of protection against foreign or domestic enemies. The only pretext for the increase of that force was, the extraordinary apathy of the people who had property to defend in the disturbed districts of England. In Scotland there were 7 or 8,000 volunteers and yeomanry. In Lancashire there were but 500 yeomanry, and not a single volunteer. If the great body of the people were really tainted with revolutionary principles, the addition even of 50,000 men to the military force would not subdue them, but would add fuel to the flame. The history of France and of Spain, and of every other country that had undergone a revolution, proved this. If, on the other hand, the mass of the people were well affected, they should be called on to defend themselves. He should suggest that, as the noble lord (Nugent)
1083
The motion and the two amendments having been put,
Sir H. Vivian
said, he was as great an enemy to a military despotism as the noble lord, but he thought it was the duty of government to protect the well-affected. When he considered the state of the public mind during the last autumn, and recollected the blasphemous and seditious publications that were disseminated, he could not but congratulate the country on the escape it had had. The hon. member then proceeded to describe the disaffected state of the population in the west of Scotland, where he had been employed on the staff. It was, he observed, almost impossible to describe the disaffection which existed in Glasgow and its vicinity, where the population amounted to 300,000 souls. They had forgotten their duty to their magistrates, to their ministers, and even to their God. In that part of the country there were not fewer than 25,000 men prepared in every respect, but that they wanted arms, to resist the constitutional authorities of the country; while there had been but two infantry regiments and one regiment of cavalry to oppose them. If the object which so many mischievous men had in view had been carried into effect, who could contemplate without horror the events that would have taken place? The yeomanry had undoubtedly come forward, and in the handsomest manner; but he could not help deprecating the employment of yeomanry corps to put down popular commotions. The unfortunate events at Greenock, he believed, would not have taken place if regular forces had been employed. In conjunction with regular forces yeomanry corps were good and useful; but when employed against
1084
Mr. Habhouse
spoke as follows:—
Mr. Speaker;
—In better times than the present this great national question would not be left to the feeble defence which I can pretend to afford to it. In the absence, however, of abler advocates, and representing, as I have the honour to do, a large portion of this enlightened metropolis, I shall offer a few arguments in behalf of that which I presume to consider the rights and liberties of my country, now menaced by the proposition of the noble secretary at war. The noble lord has told us, that the speech by which the noble mover of the reduction of the estimate introduced his amendment, was fit only for the hustings of Covent-garden or of Palace-yard. The noble lord, although living not far from these scenes, seems not to he aware that—thanks to the exertions of his colleague's,—the people are shut out from one of those arenas for discussion, and that the same salutary interference has left the other open only at stated times and seasons. The noble secretary has also told us, that the speech of the noble mover was calculated only for reformers—to this I will say, that
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald
said, that though he was aware that a sense of duty actuated the hon. member who had just sat down in delivering his sentiments to the House; yet he could not help noticing some of the opinions of that hon. gentleman. He should not attempt to follow him through all his arguments, but he would beg leave to call the attention of the House to one sentence in which he had said, that he would vote for the disbanding of the army altogether. He would not quarrel with the conclusion arrived at by the hon. member because he was confident that the House would not be induced to ground a vote on it. He would call the attention of the House to the state of the country with which he was connected, and declare it to be his conviction, that unless some precaution was taken before the next session the force now in Ireland would be insufficient. He spoke of the western districts. He had been present at public meetings where unanimous applications had been made for additional troops. The majority of the people was not disaffected. The middling classes of the country and the proprietors were loyal, and opposed to every treasonable practice. Within the last two months peace was preserved in one county only by the introduction of one quarter of the troops which the hon. member had said, would be sufficient for
1094
Mr. W. Smith
said, that the reduction of the army, like the question of reform, was one of those points, the advantage of which was always admitted, though the time for adopting it never arrived. He did not like to hear the interests of the army spoken of in that House; for in that House they could not be said to have any interests as separated from the country at large. With respect to Ireland, it struck him, that no greater censure could be pronounced upon the system of government than what was implied in the necessity of a large military force to prevent insurrection and rebellion. Ireland had none of the marks of a well governed country, whose characteristics were a happy and a contented people. Unless different measures were adopted, they could govern that country only by the musket and the bayonet, and would find it a source of weakness instead of strength. He would not go the length of his hon. friend and vote for the abolition of the whole army. Our garrisons abroad must be maintained.
Mr. Hobhouse
explained that he had said "at home."
Mr. Smith
continued. He would not say that the army was maintained for the express purpose of subjugating the liberties of the country, but he would say what was perhaps as offensive that it had been kept up partly from habit. We had gradually been accustomed to 7 000, 18,000, 35,000, and 70,000 men. We had become accustomed to millions in finance, and thousands of men in the army. The taxes ground down every class in this country, and the greatest discontent arose from that cause. The interest of the national debt was the great enemy that caused distress and disaffection; that increased sedition, if not blasphemy in the country. The influence it gave to ministers was one reason for so large a standing army.
Mr. Martin,
of Galway, said, he would tell the hon. gentleman opposite the rea-
1095
The Speaker
was satisfied that he needed only appeal to the hon. gentleman whether his observations in the first place had any thing to do with the subject before the House, and whether, in the second, they were consistent with order?
Mr. Martin
was ready to bow to the authority of the Chair, but if those expressions were offensive to the House, he
1096
The Speaker
was sure the hon. member would thank him for giving him an opportunity of explaining that which he was convinced was not offensively meant, though it was most offensive to the House, and might be deemed so by one of its members.
Mr. Martin
stated, that noting was farther from his intention than to say any thing offensive to the House, or to any of its members. He was most penitent, and asked ten thousand pardons.
Lord Nugent
rose to reply; when the Speaker observed, that the question before the House was, whether the numbers should stand as in the original clause, to which the noble lord had moved an amendment, which had been since followed by another. The noble lord could therefore only be heard in explanation. The question being put, "That 92,224 stand part of the question," the House divided: Ayes 101. Noes 46. The bill was then passed.
List of the Minority.
Aubrey, sir John
Lloyd, sir Ed.
Althorp, viscount
Martin, John.
Benett, John
Milton, vise.
Barratt, S. M.
Monck, J. B.
Bright, H.
Palmer, C. F.
Bernal, Ralph
Parnell, Wm.
Carew, R. S.
Power, Rd.
Creevey, Thos.
Pym, F.
Calcraft, J. H.
Robinson, sir G.
Duncannon, viscount
Ricardo, David
Ebrington, viscount
Rumbold, C.
Griffiths, J. W.
Smith, hon. Robt.
Guise, sir W. B.
Smith, Wm.
Gurney, R. H.
Sykes, Dan.
Hughes, col.
Wilkins, W.
Hurst, Robt.
Wood, ald.
Hume, Jos.
Whithread, Sam.
Heathcote, Gil.
Western, C. C.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Winnington, sir E.
Harbord, hon. E.
Williams, Wm.
Harvey, D. W.
Webb, Ed.
Honeywood, W. P.
TELLERS
Haldimand, Wm.
Nugent, lord
Lambton, John G.
Davies, col.
Lushington, Dr.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, June 16, 1820.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS BILL.]
On the first reading of the Insolvent Debtors Bill,
Earl Grosvenor
adverted to the case of
1097
The Lord Chancellor
observed, that he would be very much obliged to the noble lord or any other person who could show him how relief could be administered in cases which really deserved it; but the subject had been much misunderstood. The committals for contempt generally arose in consequence of the party refusing to do some act ordered by the court. Now, if the party had the power, and refused, his case was similar to that of a debtor, who, though he had the means of payment, allowed himself to be taken in execution, and chose to remain in prison; and if the present Jaw did not apply to such a debtor, why should it in the case of contempt? In fact, it was not the law that imprisoned the party, but the party that imprisoned himself. Suppose an individual, who is entitled to have the conveyance of an estate from another, calls upon a court of equity to make an order to that effect, and, when the order is made, the individual refuses to obey, and is thrown into prison, was it the fault of the court that the individual rather chose to remain there than to make the conveyance? If there were any cases to which relief could with propriety be extended, he would most readily concur in any measure to that effect. But their lordships must be careful that such measure was consistent with the principles of justice. It was impossible to give relief in cases where men, to the injury of others, refused to do acts which they were legally called upon to perform, and instead of obeying the order of the court, by which they would be relieved, rather chose to stay in prison and complain.
SECRET COMMITTEE ON THE PAPERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE QUEEN.]
The Earl of Liverpool
rose to move to discharge the order for the meeting of the secret committee to-morrow,
1098
The Marquis of Lansdowne
did not wish to oppose the motion of adjournment; but he could not help expressing his surprise at the extraordinary nature of the proceeding. He believed this was the only case in which a measure adopted on a communication from the throne had been suspended without any public reason being assigned for the interruption, or any fresh communication on the subject being received from the throne. At the same time he believed there were very strong and cogent reasons for the course which the noble earl now recommended—reasons so strong and cogent as to supersede the orders and usual practice of that House, which were themselves of the greatest importance. Their lordships must, however, now clearly perceive the singular and extraordinary predicament in which they had been placed by the hasty appointment of the committee. When, however, the whole business should be brought to a conclusion, he hoped the noble earl would find some means of explaining the extraordinary circumstances which had taken place to the satisfaction of the House, and that the transaction would be entered on the Journals in a way to remove all future doubt or difficulty on the subject.
The Earl of Darnley,
though he did not object to the motion, found it impossible to avoid expressing the sense he entertained of the disgraceful state into which the House had been brought, in consequence of following the advice of the noble lord opposite, and appointing the committee. He hoped their lordships would on future occasions weigh well the consequences of their decision before they came to a vote which might involve them in so much inconsistency. He hoped and trusted they would take warning from what had taken place in this extraordinary proceeding.
The Earl of Liverpool
had no intention of saying any thing more on the subject than what he had stated on moving the adjournment of the committee. He would
1099
The Earl of Darnley,
notwithstanding what had been said by the noble lord, still felt the weight of the difficulty in which the House was placed, which had arisen from their lordships being prevailed upon to agree to the appointment of a committee before it was known in what way the other House would proceed. It had been expected that the other House would have been as pliant as their lordships House; but in this ministers were disappointed. The concurrent vote which was anticipated had not taken place: and, in consequence of their lordships reliance on the opinion of the noble lord opposite, they were now placed in a most extraordinary and unprecedented situation. His noble friends had fully warned their lordships of the difficulty into which they were about to entangle themselves, and they must now be sensible that if their advice had been followed it would have been avoided.
The order for the meeting of the committee was then postponed to Tuesday.
ROYAL MARRIAGE ACT.]
Lord Holland
rose to bring in a bill for the repeal of the Royal Marriage act. It being the unquestionable privilege of a peer to introduce a bill without asking leave, and it being so much the practice of the House to have a bill read a first time on its being
1100
1101
1102
The Earl of Liverpool
admitted that it was usual to allow a bill presented by a noble lord to be read a first time, but the noble lord was in error if he conceived this to be a matter of right. It certainly was the practice of the House to let a bill pass through the first reading unless it contained something so palpably gross as to render it inadmissible. He certainly did not mean to oppose the present motion; but at the same time he thought it necessary to observe, that he had the most decided objection to the principle of the measure proposed by the noble lord, and that he would at the proper time 6tatelhe grounds of his objection.
Lord Holland
in explanation, observed, that he had not demanded their lordships' assent to the first reading as a matter of right, but had stated that to permit a bill to pass through that stage was so much the usage of the House, that any noble lord to whom the same indulgence was refused would have reason to consider himself hardly dealt with.
The bill was then read a first time.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, June 16, 1820.
EAST INDIA COMPANY'S VOLUNTEERS BILL.]
Lord Binning
brought in a bill "to enable the East India Company to raise and maintain a Corps of Volunteer Infantry," and moved, that it be read a first time.
Mr. M. A. Taylor
called upon the noble lord to state some reason for so extraordinary a proceeding in a time of peace, and when it had been resolved to disembody the corps of infantry. Until he had a satisfactory reason he must oppose such a bill.
Lord Binning
said, he feared it was not in his power, in that stage of the bill to give a full and satisfactory reason for the measure. The East India company considered it proper to have such a corps in that part of the town, and it was necessary to apply to parliament to enable them to carry that measure into effect.
Mr. Hume
said, he was aware of what the object of the volunteer corps was, and perhaps the House would be surprised when they heard that object, and the way in which it was intended to provide for them. The object was to protect the company's
1103
Lord Binning
denied that the affairs of the company were in the state described by the hon. gentleman.
Mr. Creevey
considered it necessary, before the House agreed to such a measure, to ascertain whether the company were competent to meet the charge. That House should have the India budget before them, and a full inquiry into their actual condition.
Mr. Bernal
did not see any disturbances existing to justify the raising of 4 or 500 men as volunteers in the heart of the metropolis. Without good grounds being offered to justify them, he would resist the measure.
Lord Binning
could not help remarking, that the other night, when some allusion had been made to this subject, a gallant officer opposite had strongly called for the raising of volunteer corps in England, and his observations had been loudly cheered; yet the hon. gentleman now contended that they were quite unnecessary.
Colonel Davies
did conceive, certainly, that the raising of such corps was the most constitutional increase which could be made to our military establishment, because it was an increase emanating from the people themselves; but, then, he contemplated that the standing army was to be reduced in proportion.
The bill was read a first time.
SECRET COMMITTEE ON THE PAPERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE QUEEN.]
Lord Castlereagh
rose for the
1104
Mr. Tierney
observed, that, now it was understood from the noble lord that there was to be no further adjournment after Monday, he would be the last person in the world to object to the proposition.
Mr. Brougham
entirely concurred with the noble lord in the expression of that great reluctance which must be felt on both sides of the House, that any longer delay should take place, unless a most absolute necessity were shown. At the same time, the delay which had occurred hitherto, he must declare; had been perfectly unavoidable. He took upon himself to say that neither party had been to blame; and that it was impossible to show a greater wish to expedite the business than had been manifested by both throughout the matter. He begged leave to add, his own opinion was, that beyond Monday next no circumstances, so far as human probability could anticipate them, would warrant any farther adjournment of the business. He would beg to say one word more: he entreated that the House would keep its mind entirely in the same stats that it was upon the first night this subject was broached; that it would consider that it stood now, and should stand upon Monday next, until the debate came on in precisely the same situation as before.
The motion was agreed to.
1105
FAILURE OF BANKS IN IRELAND.]
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
laid upon the table a variety of papers and documents relative to the state of commercial distress in Ireland. The right hon. gentleman observed, that in submitting, on a future occasion, a specific motion connected with these papers, he should feel it his duty to propose a measure of relief similar to those which had been adopted in the year 1793 and 1811 by parliament. In answer to a question which had been put to him the other night by an hon. member, he had replied, that it was not proposed by his majesty's government to lay before the House any proposition of this kind; and by any other answer he felt very sure that he should at the time have exceeded the intentions of government. But his majesty's ministers having since received, from a variety of quarters, very many and very urgent applications for relief, they felt it their duty no longer to permit the matter to remain in this state, nor by their silence to warrant an apprehension that the distresses of any part of the United Kingdom were unheeded by them. He would here briefly notice what were the intentions of government in laying this subject before the House, and, in particular, what proposition it meant to offer, with reference to those measures which the lord lieutenant of Ireland, acting upon his responsibility, and expecting the sanction of government, had adopted, in consideration of the great public distress which recent events had occasioned in Ireland. He would state what the principal of those measures were. The House would be aware, that in 1817 a bill was enacted for the application of a particular sum of money in the execution of public works in Ireland. A very considerable part of that sum remained unappropriated, to the extent of about 100,000
l.
l.
1106
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
admitted that the grant alluded to in Mr. Gregory's letter was made not for the purpose of relieving commercial distress, but of employing a certain sum upon the erection of public works. The House would feel that it was the duty of the lord lieutenant, and of the government here, to bring this subject as early as possible under the notice of parliament. The application of the money by the lord-lieutenant was certainly in some degree irregular, and the first object to which he should have to call the attention of the committee would be, the obtaining of a vote extending its sanction to the purposes to which the money had been so applied. Since the date of the petition, the House could not be ignorant that the most distressing and calamitous events had befallen Ireland; they could not be ignorant of the great depression under which commerce, and indeed every individual, laboured. He thought that they would immediately see the analogy between the present case and the measure brought in by Mr. Pitt in 1793: that was intended at the time to preserve the stability and circulation of the country banks. Under very peculiar circumstances Mr. Pitt, for the first time, made a similar application, by calling on
1107
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
1108
Dr. Lushington
felt assured that the House would hear what had fallen from the right hon. gentleman with great regret. He had taken for his precedent what Mr. Pitt had thought fit to do in 1793. To the best of his recollection, Mr. Pitt, perceiving that the country bankers were in danger of stopping, and that the circulating medium in consequence would be greatly diminished, had determined to afford them assistance; but the right hon. gentleman seemed to have forgotten that that assistance had been given in consequence of the recent commencement of a war, and of the occurrence of other events which country bankers could not have anticipated. But in the present case the chancellor of the exchequer had not thought fit to state any of the circumstances that had led to the failures in question, and he (Dr. L.) protested against such a grant merely upon the grounds of commercial distress. He was somewhat surprised that nothing had been said by the chancellor of the exchequer regarding the distresses prevailing in the south-west of Scotland. It was clear that, in Ireland, the houses that had failed had over traded; they had entered into improper speculations, and when the day of reckoning arrived, they were not prepared to meet the demands upon them The consequence of this grant would therefore be, that mercantile and banking concerns generally would be induced to follow the example of the Irish houses, in the confidence that, if they failed, government would interfere in their behalf. He should, however, consent, though reluctantly, to the vote, because he was aware, that such was the state of distress in Ireland, particularly among the lower orders, that the most dreadful results might occur, if resort were not had to some measure of this description.
Sir G. Hill
argued, that whatever might be the culpability of overtrading on the part of individuals, which perhaps might have been the case, the innocent and industrious were not to be indiscriminately punished with the improvident. There was more than one precedent for such a proceeding: in the case where parliament voted a similar mode of relief to Ireland in 1793, not a shilling had ultimately been lost; but a balance had been made out in favour of the country.
Lord A. Hamilton
saw no reason, in
1109
Mr. Grenfell
concurred with the noble; lord in what he had said regarding paper currency, and he was happy to add, that that system was now about to terminate. The object was not to relieve the merchants and hankers, but the suffering punctuation; as far as it was practicable; and if it were necessary that a communication should be made to the lord-lieutenant of Ireland before the present vote was carried into a law, he thought that much of the benefit would be destroyed by the delay.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that the vote he had proposed was intended for the relief of the people of Ireland generally from the distress occasioned by recent failures, from whatever cause those failures might have arisen. With regard to delay, he agreed that it would be better to avoid it, and that the bill to be founded on the bill should be passed through all its stages without hesitation.
Mr. Foster
said, that the object of the grant was, to stop the progress of the evil and not to encourage speculation. The necessity of an immediate remedy was obvious from the fact that eight banks had failed in the south-west of Ireland; and if the failures reached Dublin, it was probable that they would also extend north-ward, and materially injure the linen I trade, now conducted through the medium of paper, but formerly depending upon gold alone. Only yesterday, advice was I received of the stoppage of one Dublin bank connected with the north of Ireland; and the consequence had been a heavy run upon the most firmly established1 banks of that city. They had been able
1110
Mr. C. Grant,
after what had been so ably and feelingly stated on this subject, did not consider it necessary to trouble the committee with many words upon it. The object of the proposition was not to relieve the innocent and unfortunate sufferers. If such a measure could be accomplished, he was sure the House would do it by acclamation. But that was impossible; and all that could be done was, by circuitous means, to endeavour to obviate the extension of the evil. It was impossible for him, however, to advert to the distresses which so unhappily prevailed in the South of Ireland, without at the same time adverting to the temper and patience with which those distresses had been borne. Destitute as the inferior classes of the population were of the means of obtaining either employment or food, there was nevertheless no example among them (except in one trifling instance) of any resort to improper modes of relief. He wished further to say, that although he entirely agreed with his right hon. friend in the expediency of proceeding with the utmost dispatch in affording ail the relief that could be afforded, the purpose of the grant had been, to a certain extent, anticipated by the lord lieutenant, who had, on his own responsibility, issued 100,000
l.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
expressed the high satisfaction which lie felt at the proposition; and concurred with his right hon. friend near him in pressing on the House the immense importance of accelerating its execution, as he considered it to be pregnant with as much moral as practical advantage. When the people of Ireland saw that government and parliament had taken up the business as they had done, he did hope that a great deal of the; immediate pressure would be diminished. If the learned doctor who had given a reluctant consent to the measure knew but a tenth part of the distresses that existed, and of the way in which they were submitted to, he would not have qualified his concurrence in the proposition as he had done. He begged leave to suggest to his right hon. friend the consideration, whe-
1111
Mr. C. Grant,
adverting to what had just fallen from his right hon. friend, said he had been authorized by his majesty's government to write to the lord lieutenant of Ireland, which he had that night done, to assure him that he might take such measures as were calculated to meet the evil, in the full confidence that they would receive the sanction of parliament;
Mr. W. Parnell
supported the resolution.
Lord Castlereagh
congratuled his native country on the strong sympathy and participation which was felt in the House with reference to the unhappy distress that prevailed in it. He had always been persuaded that such was the partial feeling of parliament for Ireland. If such a proposition had been made with regard; to any part of England, it would have been viewed with considerable jealousy; but the resolution which been that night moved by his right hon. friend, had been received but with one solicitude by all sides and all parties—namely ah anxiety to do all that it was possible to do for Ireland, under her present circumstances of pressure He trusted that the measure, like other preceding measures of a similar description, would have a great practical operation although he allowed, with his right hon. friend behind him that the, moral effect of it would be very considerable. He was persuaded that every hon. member who, like himself, was a native of the sister country, must feel great gratitude to parliament for their prompt acquiescence in his right hon. friend's proposition.
Mr. Finlay,
adverting to former measures which had been adopted under similar circumstances in this country, observed, that they had been productive of the greatest advantage to the community. He hoped and believed that the effect of the proposition would, in a great degree, arrest the evil.
The Resolution was agreed to.
1112
MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES.]
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, to which the Miscellaneous Services were referred, Mr. Arbuthnot moved "That 476,294
l.
Mr. Hume
wished for some explanation of the reason, why the estimate of the present year was nearly 100,000
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Arbuthnot,
in reference to the mode in which the present estimates were framed, said they had been drawn up by a very accurate and intelligent individual, with whose merits, he believed, the hon. gentleman was well acquainted. Next year they would be presented separately. As to the cause of the, extension of these estimates, he agreed with the hon. gentleman, that was the consequence of the additional number of troops which it had been found necessary to embody. one item of increase, to the amount of 25,000
l.
l.,
l.
Mr. Bennet
deemed it right to call the attention of the committee to the amount of this vote, and the circumstances attending By the new schedule presented
1113
l.
l.
1114
Mr. R. Ward
order to show the necessity of erecting the barracks which had, been recently built in the country, adverted to several places, and particularly Chester arid carlisle, where such precautions had been taken in consequence of those places having been reconnoitred by the radicals, and declared so vulnerable that they might be taken in half an hour. With reference especially to the latter city he had lately witnessed a scene there which sufficiently proved the necessity of military protection; and he was persuaded that the hon. and learned member for Winchelsea, who was present at that scene, if he were in the House, would corroborate his statement: he had seen a number of respectable individuals—ladies, and gentlemen—who were going to a public entertainment in Carlisle, grossly insulted by the populace, and told that it was the last time they should ride in their carriages, and the last time they should wear diamonds. He was confident that the tranquillity of the country required
1115
Colonel Davies
supported the opinion of Mr. Bennet. He observed that in 1818 the whole amount of the barrack expenditure was 99,000
l.,
l.
l.
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he could assure the committee that the increase of the barrack expenditure was no voluntary act of his majesty's govern-
1116
1117
Mr. Hume
could not refrain from declaring that the subject was one on which he thought the people ought justly to feel great alarm. There were no less than 97 barracks in the country; all of them with regular establishments. It bad been lately said by ministers, that the additional troops were requisite to meet a temporary exigency; if so, why provide them with permanent accommodation? In Manchester, for instance, where there was already one barrack, another was erecting at an expense of 28,000
l.
Mr. Arbuthnot
said, that before his majesty's ministers had come to a determination to erect new barracks in the proposed districts, they had made every necessary inquiry on the subject, the result
1118
Mr. Abercromby
observed, that be would not have said a single word on this occasion, were it not that he felt it necessary to state the reasons which induced blip to vote for the motion of his hon. friend. He did not mean to enter now into that part of the question, which from the statement of the chancellor of the exchequer, appeared to be of so alarming a nature, particularly to those who understood the principles of the constitution. It would be idle now to enter upon that part of the question. The right hon. member had taken credit for a reduction being made in the barrack department, while on the other hand it was shown that it had been progressively increasing daring the last three years. In a word, the statement of the chancellor of the exchequer was neither more nor less than this, that such was the state of the population of this country; such was the alienation of the people's feelings from the government of the country, that his majesty's
1119
The Chancellor of the Exchequer,
in explanation, said, that the hon., and learned member had misunderstood him. What he said was, and lie did not hesitate again to avow it, that such was the state of some of the population in the metropolis and in several oilier districts, that it became necessary, in order to protect the property of the industrious well-meaning, to establish barracks and keep troops in those disturbed districts.
Colonel Davies
said, that in mentioning temporary barracks, he did not allude to old stores or other buildings. If it were found necessary to erect barracks for a time, they might be built of wood. This would be a sufficiently strong, and a much cheaper mode of erecting barracks, than by erecting them of stone.
Mr. Calcraft
said, he had understood the right hon. gentleman in the same way as his hon. and learned friend, and that he had actually put the merits of this question upon the general and notorious disaffection of the people. It was evidently the system of the government in this country that had created the discontent and dissatisfaction which the right hon. gentleman acknowledged to exist, and which he stated as the groundwork that rendered the erection of barracks necessary. He conceived that ministers did not look into their own measures with a scrutinizing eye. If they did, they would there trace the causes of that alienation of public feeling, and of that general discontent, of which they complained. The present was a very large question, and, if pursued, would lead them into a debate on the general state of the country. He had no hesitation in saying, that if, when the repre-
1120
l.
l.
Mr. W. Smith
expressed his regret that such large sums should be voted in such a manner. This was a question of confidence. It might be right to extend confidence to ministers, but here this
1121
l.
Mr. Arbuthnot
said, with reference to the sum charged for repairs, that it was Impossible to have a large range of barracks, without incurring a great expense every year for keeping them in a proper state. If the barracks had been originally constructed in a solid manner, such sums would not be necessary for repairs; but many of them were formed of wood, and were very much decayed.
Mr. Creevey
said, he observed, in the present estimates, a sum of 14,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
l.
l.
l.
l.
1122
Mr. Arbuthnot
said, the two sums of 2,000
l.,
l.
Sir H. Parnell
wished to be informed whether the Irish barrack department was not under the control of the Treasury. If there was reason to complain of the expense of that establishment here, there was still greater reason to complain of it in Ireland. The expense, last year, in that country, was 123,000
l.
Mr. Arbuthnot
said, that the barrack estimate for Ireland was always brought forwardby the chief-secretary for that country. Of course the chief-secretary for Ireland would introduce the charge in the services for the year.
Mr. T. Wilson
conceived gentlemen were wrong when they attributed all the evils of the country to the measures of
1123
Mr. Calcraft
hoped the hon. gentleman would forgive him if he said that, when members of the House of Commons were about to vote the money of the people, they had a right to make such observations as they might think fit. They were sent to the House for that purpose. They were called on to canvass every proposition brought before them. When money was demanded, it was their duty to call on the chancellor of the exchequer to state his reasons for requiring it, and in return, to acquaint him with their views on the subject. The hon. gentleman certainly was not so much in the habit of objecting to votes of money as individuals on his side of the House were; but that circumstance, however they might regret it, would not render them less vigilant. With respect to a question, as to the difference of expense for building the barracks at Leeds and at Glasgow, no answer had been returned to it; and, as a member of the House of Commons, he conceived that he had a right to have that circumstance explained.
Mr. Arbuthnot
believed that the inha-
1124
Mr. Abercromby
said, he had stated no opinion of his own, originally, but had quoted an opinion, an extremely alarming one, of the chancellor of the exchequer. He had since heard his qualification, which was, that his was a partial and not a general statement. How far it was partial or general must be collected from the proposed erection of barracks all over the country.
The committee divided: Ayes, 72; Noes, 30. Majority for the Resolution, 42.
List of the Minority.
Althorp, lord
Griffith, J. W.
Abercromby. hon. J.
Harvey, D. W.
Bright, R.
Hume, J.
Beaumont, T. W.
Lennard,T. B.
Boughey, sir J.
Lushington, Dr.
Bernal, R.
Monck, J. B.
Calcraft, J.
Martin, J.
Calcraft, J.H.
Ord, W.
Clifton, lord
Palmer, C. F.
Colbourn, R.
Parnell, sir H.
Coffin, sir I.
Ricardo, D.
Creevey,Thos.
Smith, Wm.
Denman, T.
Smith, Saml.
Davies, col.
TELLER.
Ellice, E.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Farrand, R.
On the resolution, "That 25,000
l.
Mr. W. Smith
said, that every shilling of the money granted for the same purpose for many years had been misapplied. It would appear from the accounts, not merely for the last years, but for many years before, that the money which had been expended did not in any degree promote the expected object. The slave trade was not, in consequence of that expenditure, prevented. Were he to speak out on this subject, he would use very severe epithets indeed. He considered the expenditure any thing but advantageous to the country. He had no hesitation in saying, that the transfer to the government of those forts from the African company was a salutary measure. In the first place, a sum of 1,200
l.
On the resolution, "That 150,000
l.
1125
Dr. Lushington
said, he believed the House was ignorant of the manner in which this sum was incurred by the government of the country. He would state how those captures originated; they were made in consequence of the neglect and ignorance of the noble lord at the head of the Admiralty, and of his colleagues. He stated this openly, and he was prepared to prove it. He was prepared to show that the instructions sent out by the Admiralty were, from the beginning to the end, illegal. He was sure no hon. gentleman would for one moment sanction them, if they were brought under consideration. He was therefore to presume that those instructions had been sent out by the Admiralty without those persons at the head of that department knowing what they contained, or what would be the effect of them. He would appeal to one act of the noble lord opposite; if the noble lord would but recollect the circumstance, he had no doubt but that the noble lord would bear testimony to what he said. The instructions in question were sent out to the different cruisers from the Admiralty, and were, as they ought to have been, acted on by the commanders of those cruisers, for he would ever contend that it was the duty of the masters of cruisers, upon receiving instructions from the Admiralty, to obey them. Under those instructions vessels belonging to Spain and Portugal were captured—and captured, in violation of every principle of the law of nations. Though an advocate for the abolition of the slave trade, he must condemn, an act which went to overturn every principle of the law of nations observed in this country from the earliest ages down to the present day. Those illegal instructions were executed as soon as they were received; great alarm followed; a number of Portuguese vessels were brought into the different ports of the coasts of Africa, and condemned in the most unmerciful manner. But instructions subsequently issued by the noble lord opposite, revoking the instructions previously issued, and containing fresh orders, saying
1126
On the resolution, "That 41,787
l.
Mr. Hume
said, that the preparations which were making for the coronation were but of a temporary nature: an unnecessary expense appeared to be incurring. Preparations intended for a mere temporary purpose were got up on a scale as expensive as if the different public situations for the coronation were to last, not for a day, but for thirty or forty years.
1127
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the expenses of the coronation would be brought under the consideration of the House.
Mr. Creevey
wished to know when those expenses would be brought under consideration.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
replied, that they would be submitted to the House as soon as the privy council should determine the amount of the expense which they might consider likely to accompany the coronation.
Mr. Creevey
asked, whether the amount of that expense would be submitted to parliament before the ceremony of the coronation shall take place?
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
replied, that it certainly would.
Mr. Hume
said, that in the last year a sum of 80,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
Lord Castlereagh
said, that however the hon. gentleman might object to them, grants of this description were also recognized by parliament, were always accounted for, and were necessary under the circumstances of the country.
Mr. Hume
said, he did not want to, have grants for secret service money altogether done away; he only objected to the extent of the present grant.
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, that grants for secret service money were always the largest in those years when general elections took place.
Mr. Huskisson
said, that if the hon. member would only look into the act he would see a special provision requiring that money granted for secret service should be duly accounted for under the authority of the secretary of state.
Mr. Arbuthnot
said, that the three secretaries of state were responsible on oath for the money expended. It was impossible for him to say how the money was to
1128
On the resolution, "That 5,000
l.
Mr. Hume
objected to this vote on the ground that parliamentary interference was dangerous. If a sum of money was to be granted to this institution, many other institutions in the metropolis, equally deserving of consideration, and with equally strong claims might and would ask for parliamentary assistance.
Mr. Bennet
said, that many of the persons relieved were juvenile convicts, whose previous character or whose parentage made it desirable that they should not be sent to the hulks. Government having thrown this charge on this society, they were bound to take part of the burthen. The change made in the character of convicts sent thither was a proof of the judiciousness of this arrangement.
Dr. Lushington
said, the institution saved the country a very considerable sum; a number of young persons convicted of petty Grimes, and sentenced to slight punishments, were received into the establishment; but no funds could withstand the constant demands that were made upon it; many persons who were actually starving, though recommended by magistrates, were reluctantly turned from the doors of the institution. The progress of juvenile delinquency in the metropolis was very great; and as the Refuge could not receive all the objects that presented themselves, he would beg to suggest to ministers, that they ought to form some place under their own direction, where those persons might be received; for, if left loose upon society, it would be only to spread vice and crime.
Mr. Lockhart
contended, that such charity, in fact, was an encouragement of crimes. The first offence should not be so lightly spoken of. A vigorous police would seize the offenders before they committed the crime, and while they were loitering and plotting, crimes.
On the resolution, "That 60,000
l.
Sir Joseph Yorke
said, he understood
1129
l.
l.
Mr. Holford
said, the Penitentiary had not and would not cost 600,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
On the resolution "That 21,000
l.
Mr. Hume
said, that a considerable discussion had taken place last year in the committee regarding the erection of a steam-engine in the Penitentiary for the purpose of easing the labour which the prisoners endured in drawing water and in grinding flour. The committee,
1130
Mr. Holford
had great satisfaction in informing the hon. gentleman, that the steam-engine had not been erected, and that all intention of erecting it had been abandoned. Instead of a steam engine, four machines had been purchased for the Penitentiary, two for the drawing of water, and two for the grinding of flour.
Mr. Lockhart
wished to know how many penitents were at present confined in the Penitentiary.
Mr. Holford
said, that at present there were 400 penitents within its walls; by that time next year he hoped there would be 700. The number of criminals convicted annually exceeded that number; and the Penitentiary was built to hold 1,000. They had sent out of it, within the last year, 30 individuals, who, he was confident, would never again have occasion to visit it.
Mr. Lockhart
said, he was afraid, if the bill of fare of the honest poor who had been driven into Lambeth workhouse, for instance, by the pressure of the times and of taxation, were compared with that of these persons who were imprisoned for their crimes, the comparison would be much to the advantage of the latter. These convicts had each a separate room, fared well, had a physician for their bodies, and a priest for their souls. He thought it a bad system that persons who were under punishment for crime, should be in a better situation than those who were suffering from misfortune.
Mr. Bennet
deprecated the tone of scorn in which the last speaker had expressed himself relative to this establishment. He should like to know what that hon. gentleman would wish to have done to the unfortunate individuals in that prison.—Were they to be left to starve? There was this difference between them and paupers in the poor-house—the pauper could leave his residence, but the convict could not leave his, being placed in it contrary to his own will. He was not for pampering the palate of a convict, but he was for allowing him that quantity of provisions which was requisite to his support. He was fully convinced of the truth of an observation of the immortal Howard,
1131
Mr. Lockhart
said, he had no such feelings as had been imputed to him; but when he saw that with improved prisons and new charities, crimes were increasing, he felt that the country was losing its way on an amiable system, and that what was really wanted was a preventive police. He protested against any plan which should put criminals in a better situation than the unfortunate.
Mr. Ricardo
thought that the difficulty of getting admittance into the prison ought to be taken into the consideration of the committee. If the officers were under the inspection of the public, they would be more likely to do their duty; and he could see no good reason why the prisons should not be subject to the inspection of the public.
Mr. Holford
thought he could satisfy the hon. gentleman that the difficulty of which he complained was nothing more than a due caution on the part of the governors of the Penitentiary. If the public at large were allowed free ingress into it, it was clear that accomplices of the prisoners might gain admission, and thus counteract all the good purposes which the establishment was intended to effect. Any person of respectable appearance might gain a ticket of admission by application to the secretary of state; but if all were admitted who desired to have admis-
1132
Mr. Ricardo
said, that the difficulty of obtaining admission into the Penitentiary was so great, that he himself, though a member of parliament, had not been able to inspect it.
Mr. Arbuthnot,
in moving "that 25,000
l.
l.
l.
Lord Althorp
expressed some surprise at what had just fallen from the right hon. gentleman. When this subject was before the committee last year, they had been told that not more than 75,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Arbuthnot
stated, that in this, as in many other cases, the actual expense had been found to exceed the estimates which had been made of them. Here the excess amounted to 30,000
l.
Sir H. Parnell
was convinced that those who looked upon this canal as a public work of no utility had taken a very mistaken view of the subject. He looked forward to it as a source of future revenue, and therefore thought that no objection ought to be made to the grant in question.
Mr. Arbuthnot
said, that if the House thought fit, he would propose that the whole sum of 60,000
l.
Mr. Hume
thought that this work, which had already cost so much money, ought to be completed; at the same time he could not help expressing his conviction that more than 60,000
l.
1133
l.
l.
l.
On the resolution, "that 40,000
l.
Mr. D. W. Harvey
wished to know the reason why such an increase of expenditure had taken place in this item. Last year the law charges did not amount to more than 20,000
l.
l.,
l.
Mr. Arbuthnot
attributed the increase in the law charges to the disturbed state of the nation, and the expenses which had been necessarily incurred in summoning and maintaining witnesses to support the various prosecutions which had arisen out of it. The solicitor of the treasury could not state what the exact amount of those expenses would be, but thought that a grant of 40,000
l.
Mr. Hobhouse
objected to this grant, on the very grounds which the right hon. gentleman had stated in explanation of its amount. He objected to it because the money which this grant was to cover, had been expended in the prosecution of political opinions. Those who thought that the recent prosecutions had been instituted without reason—and he was one who presumed to entertain that opinion—were hound to oppose the grant; whereas, those who entertained a different opinion, in all probability would support it. By making grants to so large an amount for such purposes, they enabled the Crown to fee all the talent of the country—he meant all the legal talent—to oppose the people. Briefs had sometimes been delivered on the part of the Crown to all the leading counsel on a circuit, so that an unfortunate defendant was often deprived, by such means, of the aid of eminent counsel. They would be doing an improper thing, as the representatives of the people of England—if indeed that House were the representatives of the people ["Order, order,"]—should
1134
Mr. Huskisson
understood the hon. gentleman to say, that he considered the prosecutions which had taken place during the last year to have been totally unnecessary. If the trials which had taken place at the Old Bailey for high-treason,—if the prosecutions for sedition at York, Lancaster, Chester, Warwick, Leicester, and other places, were indeed unnecessary, then of course the grants which had been voted to carry them on, were a waste of the public money. But if it was the opinion of the House, that the Crown should have power to institute prosecutions, it was necessary to supply it with money for that purpose. He could not help remarking, that objections to the amount of expense incurred by Crown prosecutions came with rather a bad grace from gentlemen on the opposite side of the house, when it was recollected that ministers had been so frequently reproved by them for making new laws, instead of prosecuting to a greater extent under the existing laws. The hon. gentleman said, that this grant was made to pay fees to all the legal talent at the bar, and to prevent defendants from having the benefit of eminent counsel. It certainly was the duty of king's counsel to give the Crown the benefit of their services; but the hon. gentleman was mistaken in supposing that all the expense was incurred by retaining-fees, for a considerable part of these charges was incurred by the attendance of witnesses, and the issuing of summonses. A part of the sum of 40,000
l.
Mr. Hobhouse
said, that those who thought the late prosecutions necessary, would, no doubt, vote for the sum; but he was not responsible for the opinions expressed by gentlemen in the last parliament: he was not to be bound by what had been said by gentlemen on that side of the House on the occasion alluded to
1135
Mr. Lockhart
observed, that all who had pleaded their own cause had been found guilty.
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, that it was quite correct, that the attorney and solicitor-generals were in the habit of receiving fees upon Crown prosecutions, whether they attended or not. It was within his own knowledge that such was the case with regard to no less than 760 prosecutions in the court of exchequer in the course of the last year, upon each of which prosecutions the attorney and solicitor-generals received ten guineas each, although neither ever attended in any one instance. There was another statement also from the hon. member for Westminster, which was perfectly true. He meant, that upon a barrister s acquiring a high character for talent, the Crown was forward to retain him on its side by the grant of a silk gown; and it was notorious, that if a person prosecuted by the Crown desired the assistance of any king's counsel, he could not obtain that assistance without paying eight or ten guineas for a licence, or dispensation from the Crown, allowing such barrister to plead for him; so that here was a sum which the prosecuted person must pay in addition to the usual fee, in order to secure the support of an advocate so unnecessarily, and he would add, so improperly retained by the Crown in the first instance. This was a system which evidently called for some revision. With respect to the expense of Crown prosecutions within the last year, he was glad to understand that there was no objection on the other side to lay before the House some accounts illustrative of the items and character of that expense, and he hoped for the speedy production of those accounts.
Mr. Huskisson
said, it had always been the custom to retain the attorney-general and the solicitor general in Crown prosecutions, and that, although they might not appear in person on the trial, they
1136
Dr. Lushington
observed, that the attorney and solicitor generals received fees upon Crown prosecutions, because they were responsible for such proceedings. But he felt that it was only in cases where such responsibility properly attached, and where they were actually consulted by government, that such fees should be given. He had known himself, of cases in which the attorney and solicitor generals had received fees without being at all concerned; in Doctors Commons for instance.
The several resolutions were agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, June 19, 1820.
SECRET COMMITTEE ON THE PAPERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE QUEEN.]
The Earl of Liverpool
rose and said:—My lords; upon several occasions I have of late had to move your lordships to postpone the meeting of the Secret Committee appointed, in pursuance of his majesty's message, respecting charges of which we are all aware, on the ground that discussion and explanations were going on, pending which it would not be expedient to enter into the consideration of the papers communicated from the Crown. It is with regret I have now to state, that contrary to the expectation entertained, at least for a time, by myself and by others, and I may say generally by both Houses of Parliament and the country, that discussion and those explanations have failed in producing the desired result, and paying upon the table a bundle of papers] I am commanded by his majesty to lay these papers upon the table, containing the details of that negotiation. As in all cases where papers are laid upon the table by command of the Crown, they are in a course of printing, and will be ready for delivering to the members of the House to-morrow-morning. Your lordships are aware that the meeting of the secret committee, to whom the papers communicated by his majesty's message are referred, stands fixed for to-morrow, but as in fairness and candour noble lords ought to have an opportunity of considering the papers I have now laid upon the table, previous to the meeting of the secret committee, in order that they may be enabled to judge
1137
This motion was agreed to.
The Marquis of Lansdowne
:—I wish to ask the noble earl, whether it is his intention to found any proceeding upon the papers which he has just laid upon the table by command of his majesty?
The Earl of Liverpool
:—I have no difficulty, my lords, in saying that it is not my intention to found any proceeding upon these papers. It will be for your lordships to judge of their contents, and it will be competent for any noble lord to make any motion respecting them that he shall deem expedient, or any motion as to the further proceeding or not of the secret committee.
The Marquis of Lansdowne
:—If I understand the noble earl, he does not mean to found any proceeding upon these papers; but it surety must follow, from the conduct of the noble earl upon this point, that his opinion is made up, that the consideration of these papers will form no ground for a further postponing the meeting of the secret committee.
The Earl of Liverpool
:—My lords, I have delivered no such opinion, nor do I mean to do it. It will be for your lordships to consider, whether there is any thing in these papers that ought to have the effect or not, of further postponing the meeting of the committee.
Earl Grey
did not rise to oppose the motion, but wished merely to ask some explanation, in the hope of obtaining, if possible, from the noble earl, something like the statement of a ground for this extraordinary proceeding. A message from the Crown, relative to the conduct of the queen-consort, had been delivered to the House; that message was accompanied by papers, containing, it was said, serious charges against her majesty; and these papers had been referred by their lordships to the examination of a secret committee. That committee, however, had never proceeded to the examination and the day of meeting had been adjourned from time to time. There appeared no reason for this conduct; none had been assigned, and none could be as-
1138
1139
The Earl of Harrowby
did not know whether there was properly any question before the House; but he could not refrain from making a few observations on what had fallen from the noble earl opposite. The noble earl had very unreasonably made it a charge against the executive government, that they did not proceed in this case by precedent. Now, he would challenge him to show, in the annals of the country, any case which could afford any precedent for the present. If there was no case from which a precedent could be drawn, and if little light could be derived from any similarity between this and former proceedings, the fair inference rather was, that ministers had acted with propriety in not attempting to establish on precedents measures for which no precedent could be found. The noble earl, perhaps, in consequence of his absence from that House, had not been correct in his statement of the cause of the adjournment of the committee. That adjournment had been proposed in consequence of the wish expressed in that House, as well as in another place, that means might be found to spare to parliament and the country the pain to which the disclosures and discussions incident on the investigation might give rise. This wish was expressed as intelligibly as the vote that had been founded upon it. But when the negotiation was now closed, would it not have been rather a ground of accusation against his majesty's servants, if, after they had advised it, they had refrained from laying a full account of all that had passed before parliament? He was convinced it would have been made a charge against them, if, after having entered into a negotiation, they had refused to give the House any information on the subject. The noble earl was also wrong in what he had stated respecting the practice of laying papers before parliament. It was, he conceived, not altogether uncommon for the Crown to lay papers on the table, without calling for any opinion on them. This had been done not merely in matters of minor importance., but at the end of a war treaties of peace had been laid before parliament without any opinion being asked
1140
Lord Holland
wished to draw their lordships attention to the real state of the subject under discussion. He understood his noble relation to have been desirous of ascertaining what the drift and bearing of papers laid on the table were—whether they were such as might be expected to prevent the sitting of the committee, or to make their lordships consider that it would be their duty to direct the committee to proceed. When the noble earl who had just sat down argued that the case was unprecedented, he did not take into consideration, that what his noble friend objected to was, not only that the proceedings were without precedent, but that they were without reason also. When there was no precedent to go by, it at least might be expected that then reason would be chosen for the guide. The message from the Crown assured their lordships that every thing had been done to avert the painful disclosures which must unavoidably take place. Besides the papers which accompanied that message another set was now laid before their lordships, without any object for such a communication being assigned. They had but very lately been told that the utmost had been done to avert the dreaded disclosures and now came forth another batch of papers to show that something more than the utmost had been done. But the noble earl acted on the present occasion in a very different manner from what was usually practised when similar proceedings were instituted. When green bags full of accusations against the people were brought down, did ministers content themselves merely with referring them to a secret committee, and refuse to say a word on the nature of the charges? By no means. An inflamed description of the contents of the bags was then given. At present, however, not a word was said,
1141
1142
The Earl of Darnley
could not avoid noticing the statement of the noble earl that the delay which had taken place was in consequence of the desire of that House. He positively denied that assertion. The vote of the House, in fact, did express a wish that the committee should be appointed, and nothing else. But it was not the opinion of that House which had been the ground of the delay, but what had occurred in another place. He would ask their lordships whether any of them really believed that the proceedings of the committee would have been delayed bad the House of Commons come to the same vote as that House had? By this transaction he conceived that the House had covered itself with disgrace.
The Earl of Harrowby
was confident that the wish expressed by every noble lord who took part in the debate on the appointment of the committee was, that farther time should be granted for discussion and explanation.
The Earl of Darnley
again observed, that it was impossible for a moment to doubt that the committee would have sat and proceeded to business, had the House of Commons come to the same vote as their lordships did.
Earl Grey,
in explanation, said, that if there were instances of papers having been laid before parliament by the Crown, on which no subsequent measure was founded there was at least no instance during a pending proceeding of fresh papers being communicated without some reference to the manner in which those papers would affect such proceeding. Ministers, in all they had said, had never given a hint as to the view they entertained of those pa-
1143
The Marquis of Lansdowne
reminded their lordships, that on the day when the message was taken into consideration, he had stated a broad constitutional doubt against the course of proceeding recommended by the noble earl. Every thing which had 6ince occurred convinced him of the propriety of the opinion he then gave; but the noble lords opposite did not on that day hold out the slightest idea that there could be any possible objection to the immediate commencement of the investigation by the secret committee. On the second day, however, before any noble lord spoke a word, the noble earl proposed a course of proceeding by which the committee, though appointed, was to be prevented from transacting business. The whole of this proceeding was roost inconsistent and improper.
The Earl of Liverpool
was now as firmly of opinion as he was on the first day, that if the committee was to be appointed, the mode which had been taken was the most constitutional, and consequently the best that could be adopted. From the circumstances which had occurred since the appointment, he was also satisfied, that the postponement of the sitting of the committee was not un constitutional, and indeed that it was highly proper. With respect to the justification of the original course, he should not go into that now; but he was fully prepared to explain the grounds on which he had proceeded, as soon as the proper time for that explanation came. All that he had proposed on the second day was, that if the House agreed to ballot for the committee, it should not sit for a few days, in order to give time for a negotiation. He was not then arguing whether it was most proper to proceed to the ballot, or to adjourn the sitting of the committee; but he was confident that the feeling of the House was, that both courses came practically to much the same point. Whatever difficulties presented themselves now, would equally have existed had the ballot been delayed. The noble baron had supposed him to have said, on the first proposition for delay, that he had no expectation of a favourable result to the negotiation; but he believed be did not assert, either that he had or had not any expectation. All that he stated was, that discussions and explanations
1144
Lord Rolle
believed that there was no question before the House, and, as the whole discussion was therefore out of order, he should if it was proposed to continue it longer, move that the House do adjourn.
Lord Dacre
did not see the propriety of appointing the committee originally. The learned lord on the Woolsack had said that the House was not likely to be called upon in its judicial capacity to decide on the contents of the papers on the table, and that therefore their lordships would not be prejudging the question by making a report upon them. But it was not yet evident to his mind what the House of Commons might do, or that it would agree with the noble and learned lord, and therefore he was against the appointment of the committee altogether. For the same reason he saw no propriety in refer ring the present papers to their lordships without some explanation, or some declaration of the course of proceeding which ought to be adopted. He rose, therefore, to ask the opinion of ministers on the subject; he wished to know why they had not given some reason for the further adjournment, and what probability there was that any steps might be taken in the mean time to prevent the inquiry altogether. He wished to know why ministers, as they knew the contents of the papers, did not take the responsibility of acting upon themselves, and tell the House whether they meant to proceed on Friday next or not. He begged the noble earl opposite to explain what was the object and tendency of the documents now submitted to their lordships—how far they extended—and what specific correspondence they embraced. Did they only contain the correspondence that passed between the ministry and: the agents of the queen during this and the last week? or did they contain any information regarding the previous negotiations?
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that the usual way of answering such a question was, to desire that the list of papers should be read.
The Clerk was about to read the list
1145
Lord Holland
said, he should move that the papers be read, in order to see if it was proper that they should agree to the adjournment.
The Earl of Liverpool observed, that the questions were distinct.
Lord Holland
maintained the right of any peer to call for the reading of papers lying on the table which might have a connection with the question in debate—the reading of an act of parliament for instance.
Earl Spencer
said, there was no question regularly before the House, but the noble earl having laid papers on the table by the command of his majesty, which must shortly come under consideration, the regular way was to read the whole of the papers. Not one of their lordships with the exception of ministers, knew what they contained, so that he thought that the titles might at least be read.
Lord Rolle
said, that if the sense of the House was against his motion he certainly should not press it. He had moved it on perceiving that there was no question before the House.
The Lord Chancellor
said, the only motion before them was the question of adjournment. How far the speeches which their lordships had heard bore any reference to that question, it was for the House itself to decide, but for his own part, he should say that he was not able to discover any. Any noble lord might introduce topics, the application of which it would be difficult to see until he had made it himself.
The Clerk then read the titles of the papers. [For the Papers themselves see this day's proceedings of the Commons.]
The Earl of Lauderdale
wished to know whether it was the intention of ministers to lay before the House any previous communications on the same subject. The House had been told at an early stage of those proceedings, that the utmost efforts had been made, and now papers were brought down which ought in justice to contain all that had passed. It was a maxim which every day's experience confirmed, that those who judged on a partial view must judge imperfectly, so that if any thing had passed antecedently to the papers now communicated, it was foolish and vain to think of arriving at any correct determination on those imperfect do-
1146
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that there was but one paper of a date anterior to the 9th, and that he should feel no difficulty in communicating it.
Lord Erskine
contended, that his majesty's ministers ought not to demand the opinion of parliament on the late proceedings without giving information on what had previously taken place. The papers now laid on the table contained the official correspondence of a negotiation instituted for the purpose of endeavouring to bring about an accommodation without the necessity of making disclosures. Before their lordships could judge of the propriety of that negotiation, they should be informed of the nature of the charge against the queen, and the evidence on which it rested. Their lordships were called upon to give advice to the Crown on this delicate question; and how could they advise his majesty what to do, without knowing the nature of the charges against the other party? The ministers who possessed the documents in which they were contained, could alone decide with propriety, and ought therefore to take the responsibility of deciding. It was plain that the House could not. He, for one, would never deliver an opinion till he was made acquainted with the whole of the charges. Some thought that her majesty's name should be restored to the liturgy, that she should reside in England and enjoy all the rights and privileges belonging to her station: and how could he or any other noble lord, deliver an opinion for or against these claims without knowing the grounds on which they were denied her? It was not from any desire to see the green bag opened that he thus spoke; but he found himself under the necessity of so expressing himself, when called upon to decide on the result of a negotiation without knowing the reasons why it was begun. He had consented to the appointment of the secret committee: he did not think such a committee either illegal or unconstitutional, but that was not the question now before the House. The question was, whether they should decide without having that information
1147
The meeting of the secret committee was postponed to Friday.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, June 19, 1820.
MILITARY DISTURBANCE.]
Lord Nugent
observed, that it was his intention to have asked a question of the noble secretary of War had he been in his place. As that noble lord was absent, he should beg to ask his majesty's judge advocate the same question. He had learned that the late disturbance amongst a portion of the guards was attributed to the failure in issuing a certain rate of allowance which I was called riot money. Recollecting that a very considerable allowance, both of bounty and pay, was made to the soldiers, he could not recognise the propriety of any increase when they were called upon for duty in any service. Knowing also, that if they were ordered to march for foreign service no such increased rate of allowance was either given or expected, by what rule should it be granted when employed against their fellow-citizens? As a very important question stood for discussion that night, he should hot enlarge upon the point at present; but he wished to; hear from his majesty's judge advocate how long it had been the practice of the; government to issue the increased allowance of riot money.
Mr. Beckett
said, he should be glad to give the noble lord a distinct answer, but he was only able at present to state, that such arrangements were made by the secretary at war.
COMMUNICATIONS ON THE PART OF THE QUEEN, WITH HIS MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT.]
Lord Castlereagh presented by his Majesty's command, the following Papers relating to the Queen:
COMMUNICATIONS ON THE PART OF THE QUEEN WITH HIS MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT.
NO. 1.—Communication from the Queen to the Earl of Liverpool.
The Queen commands Mr. Brougham to inform lord Liverpool, that she has directed her most serious attention to the declared sense of parliament, as to the propriety of some amicable adjustment of existing differences being attempted; and submitting to that high authority with the gratitude due to
1148
One o'clock, Friday, 9th June, 1820.
No. 2.—The Earl of Liverpool, in answer to the Communication from the Queen, on the same day.
Lord Liverpool has had the honour of receiving the queen's communication of this day; and begs leave to acquaint her majesty, that a memorandum delivered by lord Liverpool to Mr. Brougham on the 15th April last, contains the propositions, which lord Liverpool was commanded by the king to communicate through Mr. Brougham to her majesty.
Her majesty has not been advised to return any answer to those propositions; but lord Liverpool assures her majesty that the king's servants will still think it their duty, notwithstanding all that has passed, to receive for consideration any suggestions which her majesty or her advisers may have to offer upon those propositions.
Fife-house, 9th June, 1820.
No. 3.—Communication from the Queen to the Earl of Liverpool.
The Queen commands Mr. Brougham to inform lord Liverpool, that she has received his letter; and that the memorandum of April 15th, 1820, which the proposition made through lord Hutchinson had appeared to supersede, has also been now submitted to her majesty for the first time.
Her majesty does not consider the terms there specified as at all according with the condition upon which she informed lord Liverpool yesterday that she would entertain a proposal, namely, that it should be consistent with her dignity and honour. At the same time she is willing to acquit those who made this proposal, of intending any thing offensive to her majesty; and lord Liverpool's letter indicates a disposition to receive any suggestions which she may offer.
Her majesty retains the same desire which she commanded Mr. Brougham yesterday to express of submitting her own wishes to the authority of parliament, now so decisively interposed. Still acting upon the same principle, she now commands Mr. Brougham to add, that she feels it necessary, before making any further proposal, to have it understood, that the recognition of her rank and privileges as queen, must be the basis of any Arrangement which can be made. The moment that basis is established, her majesty will be ready to suggest a method by which she conceives all existing differences may be satisfactorily adjusted.
10th June, 1820.
1149
No. 4.—The Earl of Liverpool, in answer to the Communication from the Queen of the l0th June, 1820.
Lord Liverpool has had the honour of receiving the queen's communication, and cannot refrain from expressing the extreme surprise of the king's servants, that the memorandum of April 15th, the only proposition to her majesty, which ever was authorized by his majesty, should not have been submitted to her majesty until yesterday.
That memorandum contains so full a communication of the intentions and views of the king's government with respect to the queen, as to have entitled his majesty's servants to an equally frank, full, and candid explanation on the part of her majesty's advisers.
The memorandum of the 15th of April, while it proposed that her majesty should abstain from the exercise of the rights and privileges of queen with certain exceptions, did not call upon her majesty to renounce any of them.
Whatever appertains to her majesty by law, as queen, must continue to appertain to her so long as it is not abrogated by law.
The king's servants, in expressing their readiness to receive the suggestion for a satisfactory adjustment which her majesty's advisers promise, think it right, in order to save time, distinctly to state, that any proposition which they could feel it to be consistent with their duty to recommend to his majesty, must Have for its basis, her majesty's residence abroad.
11th June, 1820.
No. 5.—Communications from the Queen to the Earl of Liverpool.
The Queen commands Mr. Brougham to acknowledge having received lord Liverpool's note of last night, and to inform his lordship,: that her majesty takes it for granted that the memorandum of April 15, was not submitted to her before Saturday, only because her legal advisers had no opportunity of seeing her majesty until lord Hutchinson was on the spot prepared to treat with her.
Her majesty commands Mr. Brougham to state, that as the basis of her recognition as queen is admitted by the king's government, and as his majesty's servants express then readiness to receive any suggestion for a satisfactory adjustment, her majesty, still acting upon the same principles which have always guided her conduct, will now point out a method, by which it appears to her that the object in contemplation may be attained.
Her majesty's dignity and honour being secured, she regards all other matters as of comparatively little importance, and is willing to leave every thing to the decision of any person or persons of high station and character, whom both parties may concur in naming, and who shall have authority to prescribe the particulars as to residence, patronage and in-
║
1150
12th June, 1820.
No. 6.—The Earl of Liverpool, in answer to the Communication from the Queen of the 12th of June, 1820.
Lord Liverpool has received the communication made by the queen's commands.
The king's servants feel it to be unnecessary to enter in to any discussion on the early parts of this communication, except to repeat that the memorandum delivered to Mr. Brougham of the 15th of April, contained the only proposition to the queen, which the king authorized to be made to her majesty.
The views and sentiments of the king's government as to her majesty's actual situation are sufficiently explained in lord Liverpool's note of the 11th instant.
Lord Liverpool will proceed therefore to the proposal made on the part of her majesty at the close of this communication—viz. "That she is willing to leave every thing to the decision of any person or persons of high station and character, whom both parties may concur in naming; and who shall have authority to prescribe the particulars as to residence, patronage and income, subject of course to the approbation of parliament.
The king's confidential servants cannot think it consistent with their constitutional responsibility to advise the king to submit to any arbitration, a matter so deeply connected with the honour and dignity of his crown, and with the most important public interests; but they are fully sensible of the advantages which may be derived from an unreserved personal discussion; and they are therefore prepared to advise his majesty to appoint two of his majesty's confidential servants, who, in concert with the like number of persons to be named by the queen, may frame an arrangement to be submitted to his majesty, for settling, upon the basis of lord Liverpool's note of the 11th instant, the necessary particulars of her majesty's future situation.
13th June, 1820.
No. 7.—Note from the Earl of Liverpool to Mr. Brougham, accompanying his Answer to the Communication from the Queen of the 12th June, 1820.
Lord Liverpool presents his compliments to Mr. Brougham, and requests that he will inform the queen, that if the accompanying answer should not appear to require any reply, lord Liverpool is prepared to name the two persons, whom his majesty will appoint for the purpose referred to in this note.
13th June 1820.
No 8.—Mr. Brougham to the Earl of Liverpool, stating that he has received the queen's commands to name two persons to meet the two who may be named on the part of his Majesty's government for settling an arrangement.
1151
Mr. Brougham presents his compliments to lord Liverpool, and begs leave to inform him, that lie has received the queen's commands to name two persons, to meet the two whom his lordship may name on the part of his majesty's government, for the purpose of settling an arrangement.
Mr. Brougham hopes to he favoured with lord Liverpool's nomination this evening, in order that an early appointment for a meeting to-morrow may take place.
14lh June, 1820.
APPENDIX.
Memorandum for a proposed Arrangement with the Queen.
The act of the 54th Geo. 3rd, c. 160, recognized the separation of the prince Regent from the princess of Wales, and allotted a separate provision for the princess.
This provision was to continue during the life of his late majesty, and to determine at his demise.
In consequence of that event, it has altogether teased; and no provision can be made for her, until it shall please his majesty to recommend to parliament an arrangement for that purpose.
The king is willing to recommend to parliament to enable his majesty to settle an annuity of 50,000
l.
The annuity to cease upon the violation of those engagements, viz; upon her coming into any part of the British dominions, or her assuming the title of queen, or her exercising any of the rights or privileges of queen, other than above excepted, after the annuity shall have been settled upon her.
Upon her consent to an engagement on the above conditions, Mr. Brougham is desired to obtain a declaration to this effect, signed by herself; and at the same time a full authority to conclude with such person as his majesty may appoint, a formal engagement upon those principles.
15th April, 1820.
PROTOCOLS.
No. 1.—Protocol of the First Conference held in St. James's-square, June l5th, 1830.
In pursuance of the notes of the, 13th and 14th of June, the duke of Wellington and lord Castlereagh, on the part of the king, having met Mr. Brougham and Mr. Denman, her majesty's law officers in order to facilitate
1152
1st. That the persons named to frame an arrangement, although representing different interests, should consider themselves, in discharge of this duty, not as opposed to each other, but as acting in concert with a view to frame an arrangement in compliance with the understood wish of parliament, which may avert the necessity of a public inquiry into the information laid before the two Houses.
2nd. The arrangement to be made must be of such a nature, as to require from neither party any concession as to the result to which such inquiry, if proceeded en, might lead. The queen must not be understood to admit, or the king to retract any thing.
3rd. That in order the better to accomplish the above important object, it was proposed, that whatever might pass in the first conference should pledge neither party to any opinion; that nothing should be recorded without previous communication, and, as far as possible, common consent; and that, in order to facilitate explanation and to encourage unreserved discussion, the substance only of what passed should be reported.
These preliminary points being agreed to, the questions to be examined (as contained in lord Liverpool's memorandum of the 15th April, 1820, delivered to Mr. Brougham previous to his proceeding to St. Omer's, and in lord Liverpool's note of the 11th of June, and Mr. Brougham's note of the 12th of June, written by the queen's commands) were:
1st. The future residence of the queen abroad.
2nd. The title which her majesty might think fit to assume when travelling on the Continent;
3rd. The non-exercise of certain rights of patronage in England, which it might be desirable that her majesty might desist from exercising, should she reside abroad; and,
4th. The suitable income to be assigned for life to the queen residing abroad.
Her majesty's law officers, on the part of the queen, desired, in the first instance, that the fourth point should be altogether laid aside in these conferences: her majesty desired it might make no part of the conditions, nor be mixed with the present discussions. They then proceeded to state, that under all the circumstances of her majesty's position, they would not say that her majesty had any insuperable objection to living abroad; on the contrary, if such foreign residence were deemed indispensable to the completion of an arrangement so much desired by parliament, her majesty might be prevailed upon to acquiesce; but then, that certain steps must be taken to remove the possibility of any inference, being drawn from such compliance, and from the inquiry not being proceeded in, unfavourable to her majesty's honour, and inconsistent with that recognition which is the basis of these negotiations; and
1153
To this it was answered, that although the point of the liturgy was certainly not included by name amongst the heads to be discussed, her majesty's law officers felt themselves entitled to bring it forward in its connexion with the question of her majesty's residence abroad It was further contended, that the alteration in the liturgy was contrary to the plain sense and even letter of the statute, and that it was highly objectionable on constitutional grounds, being contrary to the whole policy of the law respecting the security of the succession, and liable to be repeated in cases where the succession itself might be endangered by it, and therefore it was said that a step so taken Might well be retraced, without implying any unworthy concession. It was also urged, that the omission having been plainly made in contemplation of legal or parliamentary proceedings against her majesty, it followed when these proceedings were to be abandoned, that the omission should be supplied; and it followed for the same reason, that supplying it would imply no retractation.
It was replied, that his majesty had decided that her majesty's name should not be inserted in the liturgy, for several reasons not now necessary to discuss;—that his majesty had acted under legal advice, and in conformity to the practice of his royal predecessors; and that the decision of his majesty had not I been taken solely with a view to intended proceedings in parliament, or at law. Independent of the inquiry instituted before parliament his majesty had felt himself long since called upon to adopt certain measures, to which his majesty, a9 head of his family, and in the exercise of his prerogative, was clearly competent. These acts, together with that now under consideration, however reluctantly adopted, and however painful to his majesty's feelings, were taken upon grounds which the dis-
1154
After further discussion upon this point, it was agreed that the duke of Wellington and lord Castlereagh should report to the cabinet what had passed, and come prepared with their determination to the next conference. Her majesty's law officers then asked, whether, in the event of the above proposition not being adopted, any other proceeding could be suggested on the part of his majesty's government, which might render her majesty's residence abroad consistent with the recognition of her rights, and the vindication of her character; and they specially pointed at the official introduction of her majesty to foreign courts by the king's ministers abroad? Upon this it was observed, that this proposition appeared open to the same difficulty in point of principle: it was calling upon the king to retract the decision formally taken and avowed on the part of his majesty, a decision already notified to foreign courts, and to render the position of his majesty's representatives abroad, in relation to her majesty, inconsistent with that of their sovereign at home:—that the purpose for which this was sought by the queen's advisers, was inconsistent with the principle admitted at the commencement of the conference, and was one that could not be reasonably required to be accomplished by the act of his majesty, namely, to give to her majesty's conduct that countenance, which the state of the case, as at present before his majesty, altogether precluded.
At the same time it was stated, that while his majesty, consistently with the steps already adopted, could not authorise the public reception of the queen, or the introduction of her majesty at foreign courts by his ministers abroad, there was nevertheless every disposition to see that branch of the orders already given, faithfully and liberally executed, which enjoined the British ministers on the continent, to facilitate within their respective missions, her majesty's accommodation, and to contribute to her personal comfort and convenience.
Her majesty's law officers gave the king's servants no reason whatever to think that the queen could be induced to depart from the propositions above stated, unless some others, founded on the same principles, were acceded to on the part of his majesty's government.
(Signed) WELLINGTON.
CASTLEREAGH.
H. BROUGHAM.
T. DENMAN.
1155
No. 2.—Protocol of the second Conference, held at the Foreign Office, June 16th, 1820.
The king's servants began the conference by stating, that they had not failed to report with fidelity to the king's government, the proposition brought forward by her majesty's law officers, that the queen's name should be expressly included in the Liturgy, in order to protect her majesty against any misconstruction of the grounds on which her majesty might consent to reside abroad; that they were not deceived, for reasons already sufficiently explained, in anticipating the surprise of their colleagues, at the production of this question, for the first time, on the part of her majesty, more especially in the present advanced state of the proceedings.
That they were authorised distinctly to state, that the king's servants could on no account advise his majesty to rescind the decision already taken and acted upon in this instance; and that, to prevent misconception, the king's government had charged the duke of Wellington and lord Castlereagh to explain, that they must equally decline to advise the king to depart from the principle already laid down by his majesty for the direction of his representatives abroad, with regard to the public reception by the king's ministers abroad, and introduction, of her majesty at foreign courts, but that they were not only ready, but desirous, to guard in future, by renewed orders, against any possible want of attention to her majesty's comfort or convenience, by his majesty's ministers abroad; and that wherever her majesty might think fit to establish her residence, every endeavour would be made to secure for her majesty from that state, the fullest protection, and the utmost personal comfort, attention and convenience.
In explanation of the position in which the king actually stood upon this question in his foreign relations, the instructions under which the ministers abroad now acted were communicated to the queen's law officers, and their attention was directed, as well to the principles therein laid down, and from which his majesty could not be called upon to depart, as to that branch of the instructions which was studiously framed to provide for the personal comfort and convenience of the queen, when princess of Wales.
The queen's law officers then stated, that they must not be understood to suggest the giving of a general power to her majesty to establish her court in any foreign country, and to be there received and presented by the English minister, because reasons of state might render it inexpedient, that under certain circumstances such an establishment should be made; but they wished that her majesty should have the power of being so received and treated by the English minister, where no such reasons of state interfered; and they
1156
To this it was answered, that the principle was in fact the same whether at one or more courts, and that if the king could be consistently advised to meet the queen's wishes in this instance at all, it would be more dignified for his majesty to do so generally and avowedly, than to adopt any partial or covert proceeding. The queen's law officers, referring to the decision of the judges in George the first's reign, said it would be a much more unexceptionable exercise of the royal prerogative, were the king even to prescribe where her majesty should reside, but to order her there to be treated as queen by his minister.
The king's servants, in consequence of what had passed at a former conference, then reverted to the mode in which the queen had arrived in England, and the pain her majesty must experience, were she exposed to leave England in the like manner.
They acquainted her majesty's law officers, that they could venture to assure them, that the difficulty would not occur.
The queen arrived in England contrary to the king's wishes and representations, but were her majesty now to desire to pass to the continent, whether to a port in the channel, or if it should more accord with her majesty's views, to proceed at once to the Mediterranean, a king's yacht in the one instance, or a ship of war in the other, might be ordered to convey her majesty.
After receiving these explanations, the queen's law officers recurred to the points before touched upon, viz. the inserting the queen's name in the liturgy, or the devising something in the nature of an equivalent, and intimated their conviction, that her majesty would feel it necessary to press one or both of those objects, or some other of a similar nature and tendency.
They then asked, whether a residence in one of the royal palaces would be secured to her majesty, while in this country; and observed that her majesty had never been deprived of her apartments in Kensington-palace, until she voluntarily gave them up for the accommodation of the late duke of Kent?
It was replied, that the king's servants bad no instructions on this point. They however observed, that they believed the apartments which her majesty formerly occupied, when princess of Wales, were at present actually in the possession of the duchess of Kent, and that they considered that this point had been already disposed of, by supplying to her majesty the funds which were necessary to furnish her majesty with a suitable residence.
Her majesty's law officers then inquired, whether, supposing an arrangement made, the mode of winding up the transaction, and
1157
The king's servants acknowledged this point had not been considered; but reserved to themselves to report the observations made thereupon to their colleagues.
It was then agreed that, upon every view of duty and propriety, the final decision should not be protracted beyond Monday, to which day it should be proposed that the proceedings on the king's message in the House of Commons should be adjourned, on a distinct explanation to this effect; and that a conference should take place to-morrow, in order to bring the business to a conclusion, and to arrange, by mutual consent, the Protocols of conference.
(Signed) WELLINGTON.
CASTLEREAGH.
H. BROUGHAM.
T. DESMAN.
No. 3.—PROTOCOL of the third conference, held at the foreign office, June 17, 1820.
The conference was opened by her majesty's law officers intimating, that, adverting to what had passed in the preceding conference, they had nothing to propose, but to proceed to the adjustment of the protocol.
The king's servants stating, that, before they entered into this business of arranging the protocol, they thought it their duty to advert 10 the points discussed in the preceding conference, upon which no explicit opinion had been expressed by then) on the part of his majesty's government; they then declared, that they were authorized to inform the queen's law officers, that, in the event of tier majesty's going to the continent, a yacht or ship of war would be provided for the conveyance of her majesty, cither to a port in the channel, or to a port in the Mediterranean, as her majesty might prefer.
That every personal attention and respect would be paid by the king's servants abroad to her majesty, and every endeavour made by them to protect her majesty against any possible inconvenience, whether in her travels or residing on the continent,—with the understood reserve, however, of public reception by the king's ministers abroad, and introduction at foreign courts.
It was further stated by the king's servants, that having weighed the suggestion communicated by the queen's law officers in the preceding conference, they were now prepared to declare, that they saw no difficulty (if the terms in which the same were to be conveyed were properly guarded) to a proposition being
1158
These observations not appearing to make any material difference in the views taken by her majesty's law officers of the result of the conferences, it was agreed to proceed in the arrangement of the protocols.
Before however the protocol was discussed, the king's servants desired distinctly to know from her majesty's law officers, whether the introduction of the queen's name in the liturgy, and her majesty's introduction at foreign courts, were either of them, a condition
sine, quâ non
sine quâ non.
No proposition on the part of her majesty, other than those already adverted to, was brought forward.
(Signed) WELLINGTON.
CASTLEREAGH.
H. BROUGHAM.
T. DENMAN.
No. 4.—PROTOCOL of the fourth conference, held at St. James's-square, 18th June, 1820.
Before proceeding to finish the discussion of the protocols, it was suggested on the part of the king's servants, if possible to meet the queen's wishes, and in order the better to assure to her majesty every suitable respect and attention within the particular state in which she might think fit to establish her residence (the Milanese or the Roman States having been previously suggested by her majesty's law officers, as the alternative within her majesty's contemplation) that the king would cause official notification to be made of her majesty's legal character as queen, to the government of such state.—That consistently however with the reasons already stated, it must rest with the sovereign of such state, what reception should be given to her majesty in that character.
The king's servants were particularly anxious to impress upon the queen's law officers the public grounds upon which this principle rested.
1159
The general rule of foreign courts is, to receive only those who are received at home.
The king could not with propriety require any point, of foreign governments, the refusal of which would not afford his majesty just grounds of resentment or remonstrance.
It would he neither for the king's dignity nor for the queen's comfort, that she should be made the subject of such a question.
To this it was replied, for the queen, that with respect to this new proposition on the part of the king's servants, it should be taken into immediate consideration; but her majesty's law officers observed, that her majesty was not in the situation referred to in the above reasoning, having been habitually received at court in this country for many years, and having only ceased to go there in 1814, out of regard to the peculiarly delicate situation in which the unfortunate differences in the royal family placed the late queen.
The latter observation was met, on the part of the king's servants, by a re-assertion of his majesty's undoubted authority on this point, whether as king, or as Prince Regent in the exercise of the royal authority; that the court held by her late majesty was in fact the court of the Prince Regent, then acting in the name and on the behalf of his late majesty, and that the present queen, then princess of Wales, was excluded from such court.
(Signed) WELLINGTON.
CASTLEREAGH.
H. BROUGHAM.
T. DENMAN.
No. 5.—PROTOCOL of the fifth conference, held at the foreign office, June 19th, 1820.
The protocols of the preceding conferences were read, and agreed upon.
Her majesty's law officers stated, that the proposition of yesterday had been submitted to her majesty, and that it had not produced any alteration in her majesty's sentiments.
In order to avoid any misinterpretation of the expression used on mentioning their belief that her majesty might overcome her reluctance to go abroad, viz. "under all the circumstances of her position," they stated, that they meant thereby, the unhappy domestic differences which created the difficulty of her majesty holding a court, and the understood sense of parliament, that her majesty's residence in this country might be attended with public inconvenience.
They also protested generally, in her majesty's name, against being understood to propose or to desire any terms inconsistent with the honour and dignity of the king, or any which her own vindication did not seem to render absolutely necessary.
MEMORANDUM.
The 2nd and 3rd points, as enumerated for discussion in the protocol of the first conference, were not brought into deliberation, in consequence of no satisfactory understanding
1160
The five protocols were then respectively signed.
(Signed) WELLINGTON.
CASTLEREAGH.
H. BROUGHAM.
T. DENMAN.
The titles of the above Papers having been read by the clerk at the table,
Lord Castlereagh
said, that be felt it to be his duty to apprize the House, that his majesty, feeling that every effort should be made to prevent the necessity of proceeding farther with the delicate question which had recently been brought under their notice, had consented that it should be considered elsewhere. In consequence of the course adopted having failed to produce the desired effect, he was authorized by his majesty to present certain papers, by which the whole of the proceeding would be communicated to parliament. He felt great pain in stating that the course proposed and adopted had not led to any satisfactory arrangement on the subject. From the great importance and the extreme delicacy of the question, the discussion of which had been repeatedly deferred, he felt that it would be very improper on his part, and exceedingly unfair towards the House, to press the consideration of the subject until gentlemen possessed the most authentic information connected with it. By that means the House would be relieved from the painful situation in which it at present stood, and would be enabled to judge of the efforts that had been made to arrange this unfortunate business. The papers were now in the progress of being printed, and would be given out to gentlemen early to-morrow. He therefore felt it to be his duty to move that the House should adjourn over, till Wednesday, the consideration of this question. It was necessary, before they proceeded to the farther consideration of the king's message, that all the circumstances of the case should be laid before them; that they should be enabled, at once, to view it in all its bearings, before they determined how they were to dispose of a question surrounded by so many difficulties. His lordship then moved, "that the papers do lie on the table."
Mr. Brougham,
in seconding the motion, begged to express to the House his concurrence in the view the noble lord had taken of this subject. He assured
1161
The motion was then agreed to; and the consideration of his majesty's message was further adjourned till Wednesday.
THE BUDGET.]
The House having resolved itself into a committee of Ways and Means,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
rose. He stated, that feeling how difficult it was under the circumstances in which the House was then situated, for him to obtain that attention without which a financial discussion could not be intelligible or satisfactory, he should in the shortest, as well as the clearest, manner in his power state those particulars which it was his more immediate duty to bring under the consideration of parliament on that day, without attempting to enter into the discussion of general topics, which might he introduced with equal propriety on other occasions.
l.
l.,
1162
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
1163
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
l.
1164
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
1165
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
1166
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
1167
l.
l.
1168
*
Mr. Baring
did not intend to examine any part of the right hon. gentleman's statement, but rose chiefly to express some degree of surprise that no information had been communicated with regard to the consolidated fund.
*
SUPPLIES.
Granted for 1819
Estimate for 1820.
8,782,470
Army
£.9,422,000
6,436,781
Navy
6,586,700
1,191,000
Ordnance
1,204,600
2,078,197
Miscellaneous
2,100,000
18,488,448
Total Supplies
19,313,300
1,570,000
Interest on Exchequer Bills
1,000,000
430,000
Sinking Fund on Exchequer Bills
410,000
20,488,448
20,723,300
10,500,000
By Reduction of Unfunded Debt
9,000,000
30,988,448
29,723,300
WAYS AND MEANS.
Granted for 1819.
Estimate for 1820.
3,000,000
Annual Malt
£.3,00,000
3,500,000
Excise Duties continued
2,500,000
240,000
Lottery
240,000
334,000
Old Stores
260,000
7,074,000
6,000,000
12,000,000
Loan
5,000,000
12,000,000
Sinking Fund Loan
12,000,000
Funding Exchequer Bill
7,000,000
31,074,000
30,000,000
UNFUNDED DEBT.—1819.
Exchequer Bills, 59 Geo. 3rd, c. 4
20,000,000
Exchequer Bills, 59 Geo. 3rd, c. 131
16,500,000
Irish Treasury Bills
2,000,000
Bills issued for aid to Manufacturers, Fisheries, &c. 57 Geo.
1,000,000
39,500,000
1820.
Exchequer Bills
29,000,000
Irish Treasury Bills
1,500,000
30,500,000
By Reduction of Unfunded Debt
9,000,000
39,500,000
1169
Mr. Hume
inquired whether the French contribution of two millions was forthcoming.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that the hon. member had taken the two millions of francs, which was the French contribution, as pounds. In allusion to what had fallen from Mr. Baring, he admitted the great importance of that subject, and could only plead as an excuse for having omitted it, the necessary complication of so many points as it had been his duty to refer to. In the course of last year the deficiency on the consolidated fund had amounted to 3,000,0002. The deficiency, however, had arisen before the new taxes became productive, and also included the charge of two loans—those of the years 1818 and 1819. The new taxes covered that charge, and left a surplus of 1,800,000
l.
l.
Mr. Grenfell
wished for some farther explanation as to the expected amount of the sinking fund.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
professed his readiness to lay before the committee every particular of the arrangements which he had in view, and upon which he framed his calculations. It was true, as the hon. member seemed to think, that it was his intention to cancel stock to the amount of this proportion of unfunded debt. This proceeding referred to an act of 1813, which provided for making stock in the hands of the commissioners applicable to the service of the year, and under which a plan was devised for accumulating stock to the amount of 100,000,000
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Grenfell
contended, that the plan of the right hon. gentleman was still calculated to diminish rather than cause any real excess of the revenue over the expenditure. With reference to the consolidated fund, he repeated what he had said on a recent occasion, that it was a most unseemly and odious blot on the character of the government, to allow of a constant deficiency in that fund of between seven and eight millions; and he strongly urged the expediency either by a loan, by the issue of exchequer bills, or by some other
1170
Mr. John Smith
disagreed altogether from the hon. gentleman who had just spoken, as to the operation of the sinking fund; and maintained that it created a market for stock, and thereby prevented its depreciation. Adverting to the general question of our financial condition, he observed, that although he by no means charged it as matter of blame, yet that in fact almost all the expectations which had been last year held out by the chancellor of the exchequer had been disappointed. Our revenue had decreased, and our expenses augmented; and that, five years after the termination of war! He confessed that he had long entertained a melancholy foreboding of our actual condition. For the first time he had observed a suspicion and a distrust of the credit of this country. This was a new feature in our situation. In the midst of the late long and dangerous war, this country had been considered the asylum of property. Foreigners brought property of every description to England; but things were sot much changed, that many Englishmen were at the present moment investing a
1171
l.
1172
Mr. Ricardo
said, he could not clearly understand the alleged benefit which the money-market was to receive from the right hon. gentleman's arrangement. It was certainly a subject of lamentation that, after five years of peace, we should still find our expenses increasing. According to the right hon. gentleman we had had effectually a sinking fund of but 1,000,000
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
†
1173
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
1174
l.:
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Maberly
could not but remark the great difference that existed between the present propositions of the right hon. gentleman and those which he had made last year. Last year he came down to that House, and said, that during the preceding year, he had been acting upon temporary expedients, but that he was then beginning to act upon a permanent plan, whose operation would be to make a sinking fund of 5,000,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
1175
l.;
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
1176
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
admitted, that the public had not yet made all those sacrifices, which, unfortunately, were necessary to the national security; but he felt convinced that they would not shrink from any sacrifices, when convinced of their necessity, and that every possible measure of retrenchment had been resorted to by government. Whether these contributions were made in the shape of a property-tax, or in any other shape, was a matter of no consequence. With respect to the present situation of the country, he felt the importance of an efficacious and productive sinking-fund; and he hoped that the produce of that fund would this year be considerable. There had been in the course of the last year a reduction of the public debt, although that reduction had not been so large as could be wished.
Mr. Alderman Heygate,
in considering the state of the consolidated fund, deprecated those measures which went to relieve a present inconvenience by the assistance of a loan. If the chancellor of the exchequer adopted the counsel which had been given him by several gentlemen, the effect would be to pay 5 per cent for the loan of that which the Bank now furnished, partly at a very low rate of interest, and partly without any interest at all. According to an arrangement which
1177
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
1178
l.
l.
l.,
l.
Mr. Huskisson
agreed, that it would be highly desirable that the consolidated fund, instead of being in arrear, should afford a surplus over and above the service of the year; and wished that the state of the country would admit of the sinking fund being made more efficient. In answer to what had fallen from the hon.
1179
l.
The several resolutions were agreed to.
MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES.]
The resolutions of the committee of supply to which the Miscellaneous Estimates were referred, having been reported,
Mr. John Smith
objected to the vote of 60,000
l.
Mr. Holford
justified it, and referred to the authority of Howard.
Mr. Lockhart
observed, that the whole building would cost 600,000
l.,
l.
l.
Mr. Hume
said, he had voted for the original construction of the edifice; but the estimate then only amounted to the half of what had already been expended. He was in favour of the resolution, that the building might be completed; and, after its completion, government might gain experience.
Sir Joseph
Yorke thought the buildings already finished were quite sufficient for the purpose of experiment. This grant was for a new building. He thought it very wrong on the part of government to embark in such expensive undertakings, for the purpose of indulging any member in a favourite object of speculation. The expense of printing for both Houses scarcely amounted to less than 100,000
l.
1180
Mr. Hume
wished to know whether there was any intention of allowing the claims of the American loyalists for the balance due to them. They were assured that the losses they had sustained would be fully made good to them. This, however, had not been yet done, though the subject had been frequently under consideration. He could look upon it as nothing less than a breach of the public faith.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
allowed that they were a meritorious body of men. To comply with their demands would, however, be establishing a very inconvenient precedent. They were in the same situation as many others were placed in by the chances of war.
Mr. Courtenay
regretted the view taken of this subject by the chancellor of the exchequer. He could hot allow that the case of these claimants was similar to that of any others. Their claims stood on the faith of parliament and were quite distinct from any others.
Mr. W. Smith
fully concurred in the sentiments of the hon. gentleman who spoke last. The only bar he could see in the way of the claimants, was their acceptance of a certain portion of what was fairly due to them. This, however, should form ho objection against allowing what, by every tie of justice, the country was bound to pay. Their claims were as fair, and as strong as any in the annals of war. They had not been allowed to lie dormant. They had been revived, at different intervals, during a period of thirty years. Three fourths of the claimants Were now dead; and many of them from broken hearts, in consequence of their disappointments. Lord Shelburne and Mr. Burke, though opposed to the American war, had allowed that there were no men better entitled to the consideration of the country.
The report was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, June 20, 1820.
PETITION OF LONDON MERCHANTS AGAINST ALTERATION OF DUTIES ON TIMBER.]
Mr. Marryat
said:—Mr. Speaker;—I hold in my hand a petition from the merchants and others engaged in trade with the British colonies in North America. In this petition they refer to another, which was lately presented to this House by certain merchants of the
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
The petition was brought up, read, and ordered to be printed.
THE QUEEN.]
Mr. Wilberforce
gave notice, that it was his intention to-morrow to propose to the House a motion founded upon the papers which had been laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. Brougham
begged the House to remember that to-morrow was a motion day, and therefore that the one of which the hon. gentleman had just given notice would have the precedence. He submitted to the House, in the mean time, whether it would not be expedient, seeing how deeply the hon. gentleman was engaged, in common with every other hon. member, in the result of this motion, that that should take place with respect to it which took place in regard to every motion where the government was itself engaged, as in cases where negotiations had taken place. He would appeal to the noble lord whether or no, in such cases, it was not usual to take the sense of the House previously to bringing forward the motion. The reason upon which he stated thus much was, that he took it for granted that his hon. friend was about to propose, either directly or indirectly, some renewal of the present broken negotiation. At the same time, this presumption was only founded upon the very general wording of his hon. friend's notice: he believed, however, that in such a case, it was to be expected that the hon. gentleman would favour them with the intentions he entertained in giving notice of such a proposition.
Lord Castlereagh
said, that in cases of negotiation, it was not necessary, as had been supposed by the hon. and learned gentleman for the government to take the opinion of the House at all. So in the case of the negotiations at Vienna, the House was not called upon to express any opinion previously. He, therefore, had nothing whatever to propose to the House on this subject. And his own sentiments would naturally be expressed when, upon moving the order of the day, some proposition should be brought forward with a view to render it unnecessary. The hon. member appeared to think that that pro-
1186
Mr. Brougham
was sure the House would do him the justice to believe that he fully concurred with the noble lord in thinking any course which should be adverse to the standing orders of the day was not an advisable one; but, as the noble lord seemed to feel that no defence was at all necessary to be set up, as regarded his majesty's government, so he (Mr. B.) felt it necessary, in their vindication to say, that he was perfectly satisfied that the conduct of her majesty's legal advisers, and the conduct of her majesty herself, stood also in need of no defence. He was perfectly willing to leave both to the candour of the House and the justice: of the country, and to abide by the award I of their impartial judgment.
Mr. Tierney
really thought, under the general language of the hon. gentleman's notice, that the best way would have been to have given no notice at all. If his hon. friend would now, however, state more particularly what his intentions were, and what course he intended to pursue, he would relieve himself and his hon. friends: from the degree of uncertainty in which they now stood relative to the member for Bramber's object.
Mr. Wilberforce
would have been happy to have heard what his right hon. friend had to propose as the distinct alterations to be adopted in his notice. The terms of that notice., not being drawn up on paper, might be very well susceptible of such alterations as would result from trifling varieties of opinion or slight shades of explanation. The motion in question, he thought it would be almost impossible for the House to resist, believing, as he did, that there prevailed in that House, as well as throughout the country, a real
1187
Mr. Tierney
observed, that the hon. member expressed a wish to hear suggestions from the House, without giving them any opportunity of knowing upon what subject. He once more asked, not for himself but for the information of the House, what the nature of the hon. member's motion was? He could see no difficulty in stating generally what was intended to be done.
Mr. Wilberforce
said, that his motion in a great measure explained itself; its object undoubtedly was to remove, as far as possible, all obstacles to an amicable arrangement of the differences existing between their majesties.
Lord A. Hamilton
wished merely to say, that the object of his right hon. friend was to ascertain at least the principle of the proposed motion. It seemed to be certain that that motion was to have the precedence to-morrow; and he did think, after what had occurred.:—after the papers had been printed and put into the hands of members—and after all the preparations they had made to come down to the adjourned debate of to-morrow that it would not have been too much for the hon. gentleman to have stated the substance at least of his motion. He did not ask him to mention the terms, but the object ought surely to be known.
Mr. Scarlett
felt, as every man must do, the greatest possible reluctance to go into this subject at all, but, knowing nothing excepting what appeared on the paper, Would the hon. gentleman allow him to ask, whether his motion was of a nature to restore the name of her majesty to the Liturgy? because he took it for granted that such was the proposition he intended to make.
Mr. Wilberforce
said, he would rather decline for the present giving any further explanation. He did not wish that his motion should have the precedence, although he could not help thanking his noble friend for the readiness which he had shown to concede it to him. His noble friend, by that concession, evinced a desire, in which he was joined by the whole country, to avoid, if possible, all further inquiry into this disastrous subject [Hear, hear!].
MILITARY INSUBORDINATION.]
1188
Lord Nugent,
seeing the secretary at war in his place, rose to repeat the question he had put yesterday on the important subject of the late disturbance among a portion of the military, which had been produced, as it seemed, by the withholding of certain allowances. In adverting to this subject, he felt sure that he need not vindicate himself from the imputation of endeavouring to apologize for the motives which gave rise to the alarming claim to which he had alluded, though it was one of the many fatal evils arising out of the system of military government. His question was, for what reasons, and out. of what funds, any pay or allowances had been given for special services of the military at home, when no such pay or allowances were given on service abroad?
Lord Palmerston
was happy to afford the noble lord information upon this point. It was a mistake to suppose that the late discontents in one battalion of the guards had any reference to pay or allowances: the men had alleged no such grievance, but the disorganization was produced by a notion, certainly unfounded, that the duty they were called upon to discharge was more severe than other battalions performed. Some years ago (whether at the time of the passing of the Corn bill, or when sir F. Burdett was conveyed to the Tower; he could not state) a practice had grown up in consequence of the employment of the men at night at a distance from their barracks, when they had no opportunity of procuring food, of giving the soldiers on duty certain small rations of bread, cheese, and beer, not in money, but in kind; and even this was never allowed but when the nature of the service particularly required it. It was paid for out of the commissariat department, on an account being verified of the number of loaves, and the quantity of cheese and beer, consumed. If tile noble lord wished for a statement of the amount thus disbursed, it could be furnished.
Lord Nugent
expressed his pleasure at the satisfactory explanation afforded by the noble secretary at war. He thought that the sum disbursed, however trifling, ought to come under the cognizance of parliament, though, for obvious reasons, he did not now wish to submit a motion upon the subject. He saw no sufficient reason for these rations, when the service at home was at all events lighter than that through which the men passed in the course of a foreign campaign. He ac-
1189
KING'S BENCH PROCEEDINGS BILL.]
The Attorney General,
in moving that the House do resolve itself into a committee on this bill, said, that he was aware some objections were felt to the measure, particularly by members of the bar. No one was more anxious than him self to gratify the wishes and interests of the profession, and if the inconvenience which might be supposed to follow the bill did not fall much below the good that would result from it, he would not have introduced it. At present the chief justice was not allowed to sit at
nisi prius
nisi prius
Mr. Scarlett
said, that in duty to the profession of the law, he felt himself bound to oppose the bill. It was said that business: pressed upon the court, but if the trifling causes were removed from that court which Were of no benefit to the suitors, but, on the contrary, ended in the ruin both of the plaintiff1 and the defendant, it would relieve the court and benefit the public. But when it was said that the business of the court had greatly increased for the last years, he begged leave to deny it, and, in support of his assertion, referred to a statement, by
1190
nisi prius
nisi, prius
nisi prius
1191
nisi prius.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Warren
was of opinion, considering the state of the business in the King's-bench, that this bill was absolutely necessary. What was the situation of the court at the present moment? There were about 108 causes in arrear at Westminster, and 200 in the city of London, forming an aggregate of 308 remanent causes. Any measure that tended to decrease such an arrear ought to he supported by the House. The object of the bill W3s, to employ two judges in performing the duty, which was now effected by one—a plan from which great and evident advantage would be derived. The learned gentlemen apprehended that much inconvenience would be felt from the adoption of the proposed mode. Now, he did not mean to deny that some bill, more extensive in its nature, might perhaps be hereafter necessary; but that, he conceived, was not a good reason for objecting to the bill now before the House, if, for the time present, it wrought well. If the clause relative to the duration of the bill went to render it permanent, he certainly would oppose it; but, as the learned attorney-general was of opinion that the object would be practically obtained by making the measure temporary, and as ha had given notice that lie would, in the committee, move
1192
Mr. Scarlett.
—I stated that the learned judge did not approve of the bill.
Mr. Warren
—If he understood the learned gentleman correctly, his statement was, that, unless the salary of the judge was raked, he would not undertake the duty. Another objection to the bill was, that the client would often be deprived of the benefit of that counsel whom he wished to employ. In some cases this would certainly be very disad-
1193
Mr. Lockhart
said, the learned gentleman who had just sat down had argued that, if the measure proposed were likely to remove, for the present, the inconvenience complained of, it ought to be adopted. He entirely denied the truth of this position. Ha did not consider that all inconveniences and misfortunes were good for nothing. They frequently had their benefits within themselves. For his own part, he could wish the inconveni-
1194
in banco,
nisi prius,
s.
s.
nisi prius,
1195
Mr. Chetwynd
objected to the bill, first, because it was unwise in its provisions, and, next, because it imposed a greater degree of labour on the puisne judges of the court of King's-bench, without providing for them any additional remuneration. Much of the time of the court was taken up in consequence of
ex-officio
1196
l.
Mr. Denman
felt the strongest objections to the measure now proposed. In the first instance it was to have been permanent, but now, he understood, it was to; be temporary. In either point of view: it was objectionable. If it were permanent, it would effect a permanent alteration in the court of King's-bench, and if temporary, it would produce one of the greatest evils that could be found in a; court of justice—a temporary and experimental course of judicature. Why should such a measure pass? Was the King's-bench the only court in Westminster-ball to which causes should be sent? If so, then the twelve judges should belong to; that court. But if there were two other courts, sitting almost in idleness, he thought it would show more good sense to alter their situation, rather than to remodel that court, in which justice was so; perfectly administered, as to create the very arrear that was objected to. That arrear, he contended, was not an evil for which the court was answerable. It was a circumstance caused by the popularity of the court. One court would be pen haps capriciously what might be termed a fashionable court; to it the suitors would resort, and there would be found the arrear. If, however, instead of in a king the two other courts act, they erected a third, perhaps it would be found that they had only added another to the idle courts already existing, while the King's-bench still remained encumbered with a vast mass of business. By this new plan more labour was to be thrown on the puisne judges, and he thought it was
1197
1198
Mr. Nolan
observed, that as the object and tendency of this measure was to facilitate the administration of justice, the generality of the gentlemen of the law would be decided advocates for its adoption, whether it interfered with1 their own individual interests or not. He contended that this was only a temporary relaxation of the duties of the chief justice. He did not consider that by its adoption an alteration would be made in the constitution of the court of exchequer.
The question being put, That the Speaker do now leave the Chair, the House divided Ayes, 18; Noes, 8. As there were not 40 members present, an adjournment of course took place.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, June 21, 1820.
MUTINY BILL.]
Earl Grosvenor
rose, on the order of the day for the third reading of the Mutiny bill. Before he made the motion of which he had given notice, for a reduction of the present number
1199
1200
l.
l.
1201
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that with regard to the circumstances to which the noble earl had alluded in the commencement of his speech, he must observe, that the reports respecting those circumstances had been grossly exaggerated. He had also the satisfaction to state, that any dissatisfaction which prevailed had now completely subsided; and he could assure the noble earl that it was not to be ascribed to any of the causes to which he had alluded. At the same time, he could not but add, that he thought the noble earl would have acted more prudently if, considering the state in which the affair now was, he had refrained from saying any thing on the subject. With regard to the noble earl's amendment, he felt himself bound to oppose it, though he must observe that it was with as much regret as could be felt by any man that he agreed to recommend the insertion of the words in his majesty's speech at the opening of the session relative to the increase of the military force. No man could have been more indisposed than he was to make any addition to the army, until he was convinced that the increase was necessary to
1202
The amendment was negatived, and the bill passed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, June 21, 1820.
THE QUEEN.]
Mr. Wilberforce
having been called on by the Speaker, an interval of several minutes elapsed before he made his appearance. When he at length entered the House, he rose and observed, that he should certainly have persevered in bringing the subject of his promised motion before the House that day, but for some cause which it was not in his power to avoid. The fact was, that since the House separated last night, circumstances had taken place which rendered it necessary for him to vary the motion which he had intended to make. He must add, that he made his present application with the most sincere sorrow; but, considering this as perhaps the only means now left of avoiding that fatal inquiry which presented so many lamentable consequences—he would say, so many horrors—to his mind, he could not but hope that the House would excuse him for asking his noble friend to give him another day for the bringing on of his motion—[Loud cries of "No, no."] He was sure that, how great soever might be the wish of any gentleman—and a very natural one it was—that this important question should no longer remain in suspense, he should hold himself in contempt, if he could even suppose himself to be actuated by temporary motives in a case which so deeply involved the honour of the Crown and the interests of the people. His motives, however, were of so serious a character a to justify the application he now made.
Lord Castlereagh
deeply regretted that his hon. friend should have been induced by any motives—which, although he had not explained them, and though they were not before the House, he could well conceive the hon. gentleman had good reasons for not explaining—to call on him to postpone that motion which, in point of form, would not take precedence of his hon. friend's. For himself, he should wish the hon. gentleman to bring his motion on to-morrow, rather than any thing should
1203
Mr. Wilberforce
begged leave to say, in answer to what had fallen from the noble lord, who had given him credit for the propriety of his motives, that he would explain them fully to-morrow.
Lord Castlereagh
felt assured, that his hon. friend could not suppose, that he wished him to explain them at present, or that he did not at all times give him entire credit for the soundness of his motives.
Lord A. Hamilton
begged to ask the hon. gentleman whether he had any objection now to state what would be the grounds of the motion postponed until to-
1204
Mr. Wilberforce
had that respect for the character of the noble lord which would induce him at all times to give him every satisfaction in his power; and if he were willing to converse with him in private upon the subject, he should have no objection to give him the explanation, provided no other use were made of it. From what he had stated, the House would suppose that there might be circumstances which would vary his motion in some shape. He would add, that what had passed in the course of yesterday, had rather confirmed than altered his determination not to make any disclosure of the grounds of his motion.
Mr. Tierney
owned that he had very great difficulty in agreeing to this application from the hon. member for Bramber; because, with as much anxiety as any other gentleman could possibly feel, that any reasonable delay should be granted, he thought that their present mode of proceeding was incompatible with the dignity of the House. They were placed in a situation perfectly unexampled. They had received a message from tile Crown, accompanied by papers which were laid upon the table; they had answered that message by saying that they would take it into immediate consideration. In consequence of a motion of his hon. friend, an adjournment was agreed to; negotiations in the meanwhile were entered into, which continued nearly a fortnight. At the end of that time the noble lord brought down the result of them; and now his hon. friend begged another day in order to see what he could do. When were these adjournments to stop? Other hon. gentlemen might have similar motions to propose, and a noble lord had just given notice that it was his intention to submit one to-morrow connected with this subject. In the meanwhile the king's message was allowed to sleep, in a manner which was not very respectful to the Crown. Whether the noble lord (Castlereagh) himself would or would not to-morrow be disposed to concede a farther adjournment, if called for, he (Mr. Tierney) would then take the sense of the House on the propriety of any farther adjournment beyond that day.
1205
Lord A. Hamilton
said, he intended tomorrow to Submit a motion for the production of the original order in council under which her majesty's name was erased from the liturgy.
Mr. Brougham
said, that if he rightly understood the hon. member for Bramber, he had contended, either that the House must admit his motion, or, as the necessary consequence of its rejection, must proceed with the inquiry. If it were so, he did think that one single day's delay could not be denied to his hon. friend; but then it would be clearly understood, that if that motion failed, the House would immediately proceed to the inquiry. Under all these circumstances, he would cheerfully accede to the proposed delay. He did hope and trust, however, that no circumstances would prevent his hon. friend from proceeding to-morrow; for he could assure the House that whatever anxiety was manifested on the part of his majesty's ministers, that no possible protraction of this business should occur: her majesty and her legal advisers were, on their part, equally anxious that no delay should be interposed.
Mr. Scarlett
understood the hon. gentleman's motion to be one branch of ah alternative, of which the other branch was an inquiry; but he could not agree with his hon. and learned friend that if that motion were rejected, no alternative but that inquiry was left; for, whatever might be the judgment of the House upon the case before them, he should still think that that sort of inquiry which had been proposed by ministers, and which was the only measure yet submitted to parliament by them, was one which the House never could be induced to adopt. It was so unconstitutional, that he conceived the House never would enter upon it.
Mr. Brougham
said, that his hon. and learned friend seemed to forget that he (Mr. B.) had been stating, not his own sentiment as to any alternative between the motion of the hon. member for Bramber and an inquiry, but what was his understanding of the views entertained by that hon. gentleman. Did it follow that, because he stated such to be his notion upon the subject, he therefore necessarily concurred in those views?, It was a motion which, for any thing his hon. and learned friend knew, he (Mr. B.) might mean to oppose, and it was one which, in effect, he did last night give, notice of his intention to oppose [Hear!].
1206
Here the conversation was dropped; and the order of the day for resuming the adjourned debate on the king's message was discharged, and a new order made for to-morrow.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, June 22, 1820.
SECRET COMMITTEE ON THE PAPERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE QUEEN.]
The Earl of Liverpool
assured their lordships that it was with extreme reluctance he now rose to propose any farther adjournment of the order for the meeting of the secret committee to which the consideration of the papers connected with his majesty's message was referred, and which at present stood fixed for to morrow; but circumstances had come to his knowledge which led him still to entertain hopes that some adjustment might take place which would render any investigation of the papers laid on the table unnecessary. Under these circum stances, he should not act consistently with the course he had hitherto pursued in this important and delicate business, if he did not propose to their lordships a farther adjournment of the committee.—The day for which he should propose the meeting was Tuesday next. He felt most strongly all he objections which must arise in the minds of their lordships to any unnecessary delay. He trusted, however, they would be satisfied that nothing but the most urgent considerations could have induced him to propose this adjournment and he had only to add, that if the adjustment did hot take place before Monday, he should then feel it to be his duty to propose that the committee should proceed to the investigation for which it was appointed.
Earl Grey
could not help expressing his astonishment that such a proposal should be made; but as the noble earl had stated that, from circumstances which had come to his knowledge, he entertained hopes than an, adjustment would take place, it was impossible for him to offer any opposition to the motion for postponing the committee. At the same time, it was equally impossible for him to refrain from calling their lordships' attention to the extraordinary and disgraceful situation in which the House was placed, in consequence of the conduct of the noble lord and his colleagues. He had already stated that situation to be disgraceful, and upon
1207
1208
"Adjournment, and adjournment, and adjournment,
"Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
"To the last syllable of recorded time!"
The Earl of Liverpool
was confident that their lordships would feel the difficulty of the situation in which he stood. It was impossible for him, in this stage of the proceeding, to explain the grounds of his conduct, and what were the reasons which had induced him, and those who acted with him, to tender to the sovereign, the advice they had thought it their duty to give; but he trusted that, in the interval before the time arrived when he should be at liberty to state the reasons of the course which had been pursued, then-lordships would give him credit for not having shrunk from offering any advice that appeared necessary, either for the honour of the Crown, the advantage of the country, or the particular interests of the case. He assured their lordships that, were this the last day of his existence, he could lay his hand on his heart and declare, that in no business—and since the commencement of his public life, none had been to him so personally painful—had his majesty's ministers ever given any advice to the Crown in which he was so fully convinced that they had acted in the way which was most consistent with their duty to their sovereign and their country. If he abstained from stating the reasons which had governed the conduct of his majesty's advisers, it was because it was impossible at that time to enter into them with propriety. But he denied that any imputation could, in the mean time, be cast upon them. Neither would he admit that any disgrace had fallen upon
1209
Earl Spencer
said, he would not object to this motion for the further postponement of the inquiry but had he been present in the House or in the country when the proposition was first made for the appointment of a secret committee, he should have done all in his power to dissuade their lordships from adopting so unwise and unsafe a measure. He should now of course bow to the decision of the House, yet he might be permitted to express his opinion upon the subjects. The measure being in his mind originally wrong, he could not therefore oppose the postponement of it. The measure was wrong, because it bound the House to decide upon a question in their legislative capacity, which they might have to determine subsequently in their judicial capacity. This point, as he collected from the ordinary sources of intelligence, had been strongly urged on the first night, but their lordships had decided against it. Circumstances, however, had since occurred, which pretty clearly proved that more wisdom would have been displayed, and the dignity of the House would have been
1210
Lord Ellenborough
regarded the present proposition as standing on the same grounds as all the former motions for postponement; namely, that there existed some hope of terminating by negotiation the differences which were to have been referred to a committee. He could not look upon that House as covered with disgrace by the adjournments. It was not the other House, as had been argued, that had caused these adjournments. The same cause which operated to induce the other House to adjourn operated on their lordships also. The only distinction was, that the two Houses were in a different situation as to the stage of proceeding in which delay had been suggested. Their lordships had appointed the committee, and the other House had not. When it was first proposed to adjourn the question, he had ventured to predict, that unless a short period was finally fixed, there could be no hope of an arrangement taking place; and the apprehensions he then expressed he was sorry to find were realized. From the papers on the table, he was convinced there was no hope of adjustment without the assistance of parliament. It was only through the immediate interference of parliament that any satisfactory result could be expected.
Lord Holland
observed, that the noble lord who had just spoken concurred with the noble lord opposite in the propriety of delay. The only reason assigned for postponement was the expectation of an adjustment. But the noble lord who had just sat down was of opinion there could be no settlement without the interference of parliament; and he was sure no reasons more strong could be urged, than those that that noble lord had given against the very motion he supported. He was also persuaded that the dignity of the House had not suffered by the proceedings which had taken place, because the same causes had operated on both Houses to induce them to postpone the proceedings. There was certainly something ingenious in this argument, but it was rather singular that those causes had always operated in that House precisely the day after they had operated in the other. Their lordships were now deliberating on the propriety of adjourning the committee: of course, this
1211
Lord Erskines
said:—My lords, after what has passed, I feel it, necessary to trouble your lordships with a very few words. I
1212
1213
The Earl of Darnley
remarked, that although the noble lord (Ellenborough) had avowed his belief that; negotiation could not be successful unless conducted under the control of parliament, he had with some degree of inconsistency voted for the further adjournment of the inquiry. It was more consistent that they who thought the green bag should never be opened, should support such a motion. He hoped sincerely that the question of the queen's guilt or innocence would never be brought forward, but he would not at the present moment express any opinion upon it. As little was he prepared to pass a censure upon ministers upon such points as had not been fully explained to the House, but he might express his opinion upon certain notorious facts. He could not therefore avoid remarking, that so far as these facts appeared, the conduct of ministers seemed to have been a series of false moves, in which they were constantly in check. He saw not how they could get out, but if they persevered they must lose the game. By having her name erased from the liturgy her majesty was at once condemned, without being allowed the chance of a defence. This was a proceeding under which no woman of feeling or spirit (and her majesty did not appear to be deficient in either) could sit down contented The noble earl recapitulated the measures pursued against the queen and concluded by expressing his fears that the conduct of the House would not, in the opinion of the public, appear to be free from reproach.
The motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, June 22, 1820.
MOTION FOR ADJUSTING THE DIFFERENCES EXISTING IN THE ROYAL FAMILY.]
Mr. Wilberforce
rose, to make his promised motion. He said, be could assure the House, that notwithstanding he could not plead that he had been urged into this business against his wishes, he was fully sensible of the great task which he had undertaken. So aware, indeed, was he of the extreme importance of that task, that were at not from considerations of indispensable duty, he should almost be induced to shrink, from any further proceeding. He was cheered, however, by the hope, that kind support and indulgence from the House which he had
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
Mr. Stuart Wortley
seconded the motion, and was persuaded that the House and the country could not desire a better
1229
Mr. Brougham
took the liberty of presenting himself to the notice of the House thus early in the debate, partly because, from an indisposition tinder which he laboured, he feared he might not be able to deliver his sentiments at a later period; and partly because he wished to take the first opportunity of expressing, with that candour and frankness which the great importance of the question demanded, and, at the same time, with that sincere respect for his hon. friend which long intimacy and a concurrence in the esteem of the country (at least that part of it whose esteem was worth having) had pro-
1230
sine qua non
1231
1232
1233
1234
sine qua non
sine qua non
sine qua non
1235
1236
1237
in pari materia.
1238
1239
1240
incunabula gentis,
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
Lord Castlereagh
assured the House that he felt considerable difficultyin rising to address them at that moment; and that but for paticular circumstances he shpi;d not have wished to intrude himself on the House before his hon. friend the member for Corfe Castle, who had risen at the same moment as himself. He was not so vain of his own powers as to hope that he could rivet the attention of gentlemen in the same degree that the hon. And learned member who had just addressed them had done. Indeed, the great difficulty he felt was occasioned by his being obliged to rise in opposition to the powerful impression which the speech of the hon. and learned gentleman had made on the house. He had made on the House. He had spoken on this as on other occasions, with all the talent
1246
Mr Tierney
said, that in consequence of indisposition, exertion, und the great heat of the. House, his horn and learned friend felt it necessary to withdraw for a short time. The debate need not, however, be interrupted on that account. If the noble lord did not wish to proceed at present, the hon. gentleman below him who rose, firs might deliver his sentiments. His hon. and learned friend would return, as soon as the slight indisposition he felt would permit.
Lord castlereagh
said, he would wait till the hon. and learned gentleman returned.
Here there was a pause of some moments.
Lord Castlereagh
expressed his regret at the delay. From the view he had taken, of this question, he meant to have addressed the House in a later stage of the debate, which he might have done with propriety, because no proposition was submitted to there, but that of his hon. friend, which he did not mean to op pose. But the speech of the hon. and learned gentleman, which was delivered very early in the debate, rendered it. necessary that he should explain himself as soon as possible, on certain topics which the hon. and learned gentleman had introduced.
Mr. R. Martin
said, that, seeing the House at that moment perfectly unoccupied, he hoped it would not be deemed presumptuous in him to attempt to arrest
1247
1248
Mr. Brougham having returned to his seat,
Lord Castlereagh rose and stated that he had not proceeded with his speech on account of the absence of the hon. and learned member.
Mr. Brougham
submitted to the House, that it was perfectly unprecedented for any one member to insist that another, who had a severe complaint in his chest, should be compelled to sit the whole evening in that House, and he protested against it. Since, however, the noble lord seemed to be so urgent, he, with the leave of the House, would retire to some part of the House where he would have the benefit of free air, which he stood at that moment much in need of—at the same time that he would be perfectly within hearing of the noble lord.
Lord Castlereagh
was willing to delay his observations to any period of the night that might best suit the convenience of the hon. and learned gentleman, to whom he intended the course which he had first adopted, as a mark of respect. The House must be aware, that from the nature of the relation in which they had been placed towards each other by the late proceedings, the line of argument employed by the hon. gentleman could only be met by him (lord Castlereagh), and in wishing to have his observations heard immediately by the hon. member, he was actuated by a desire to ascertain how much they understood each other. The House being cut off from the knowledge of many facts, could not possibly understand the effect of many of his (lord Castlereagh's) remarks, and therefore in the absence of the only hon. member to whom his remarks could be intelligible, he would have taken up the time of the House in vain.
Mr. Brougham
said, it only remained for him to remove the suspicion, that in withdrawing himself at the moment, he was intentionally guilty of any disrespect to the House.
Lord Castlereagh
acknowledged, that in the course of the negotiations, however he might have differed from the law advisers of her majesty as to the matter of negotiation, there could be but one opinion as" to the conciliatory tone in which
1249
1250
de jure,
1251
1252
1253
1254
de jure
1255
1256
sine qua non,
1257
1258
1259
Lord Archibald Hamilton
declared, that he was under the necessity of waiting until the motion before the House was read, before he could comprehend the hon. mover's intention—before he could determine upon the course which it was his duty to pursue. In proposing the amendment which he felt it his right to submit to the consideration of the House, as well as in the observations with which he should preface it, he begged to be understood that he spoke from no authority bat his own; and that he was not acting, in any connection whatever, with the queen's legal advisers. He had not, indeed, decided, until he came to the House, in what terms to couch his motion. There was, perhaps, no person in that House who felt more alarm than himself at the consequences but too likely to result from a public investigation of the subject which gave rise to this discussion; and therefore he was among the most eager to deprecate such a course of proceeding. In bringing forward the proposition which he had in view, he had no other object in view than that of doing substantial justice between the two illustrious individuals who were parties to the present discussion, and of had more of the House a proposition which had more of the spirit of conciliation in it than that which had been offered to them by his hon. friend the member for Bramber. For, what was the nature of that hon. gentleman's proposition; and in what manner was it connected with the measures which had preceded it? He would inform them. His hon. friend came to the House, and he could assure his
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
Sir F. Burdett
seconded the amendment.
Mr. Wilmot,
after stating the position in which the House stood, desiring these differences to be arranged by conciliatory means, rather than by public discussion, took a view of the negotiations, in which he observed her majesty's legal advisers had contended for four distinct points of concession:—1st. the acknowledgment of the queen
de facto;
1266
1267
Mr. Denman
said, that the observations which had fallen from the noble lord opposite had rendered it imperatively necessary for him to rise up in defence of the conduct of his hon. and learned friend and his own. With regard to the motion before the House, he thought be should ill discharge the duty which he owed to his illustrious client, were he to accede to the proposition of the hon. member for Bramber. He was by no means disposed to admit the refined distinctions which had been made between the duty which he owed to his client, and the duty which he was bound to perform as a member of parliament. It was impossible, indeed, to divest himself of those feelings of respect and duty which the confidence reposed in him by her majesty was calculated to inspire; but he saw not the smallest inconsistency in performing the duties of those separate capacities; for, he, would best defend the rights of the queen, who performed his duty best as an honest member of parliament. When, he considered upon what unequal terms the parties met, when he considered the power and influence with which the charges against her majesty had been brought forward, and the friendless and unprotected situation of her majesty, he thought there never was a case in which it became more imperiously the solemn duty of every honest man to stand forward as her advocate. He could not but allude to the situation in which he was himself most unexpectedly placed. He had never contemplated the possibility of being placed in the situation of a negociator upon so important an occasion, and no man could feel more strongly than himself his inadequacy to discharge its duties; but when he was told by the noble lord opposite, that his hon. and learned
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
ex-parte
1273
1274
1275
Mr. Bankes
hoped the prediction of the hon. and learned gentleman who had just sat down, that if his hon. friend's motion were agreed to, there would be more discussion on the subject, would be falsified. It was in this hope he was induced to rise and support the motion, and from a wish that this interposition on the part of the House of Commons might settle those differences which, as yet could not be arranged either by letters lor.conferences,—He bad heard the hon. and learned gentleman with great pleasure, but one observation suggested, itself as arising put of his speech. He wondered the law advisers of the queen, had so long delayed to introduce the point of the Liturgy upon which the whole case seemed now to turn.—Why had not the House heard something before of the omission of her majesty's name? The hon. and learned gentleman said, that he had only recently become her majesty's adviser; but was not the hon. and learned gentleman in the last parliament, and had he not then opportunities enough of protesting against that measure which was new affirmed by Irim to be against law.—When the hon. and learned gentleman asserted that the omission of the queen's name, was made at the discretion of the privy council, the hon. gentleman must have forgotten the 13 and 14 of Charles Sad. A noble lord seemed to be under some mistake, when he spoke of certain ministers of the church persevering in praying to: the queen, upon conscientious
1276
1277
sine, qua non.
1278
Mr. Williams
said, he should state very shortly his reasons for the vote which he meant to give. In looking at the question, he thought the consideration of, how far the honour of one party would be committed, or how much the triumph of another would be magnified, should not be at all calculated. In this view, therefore, he saw no obstacle to ministers restoring the queen's name to the Liturgy. By the 13th and 14th of Charles 2nd, a particular form of prayer was pointed out to be used on all occasions, and he contended, that the clause which empowered the king and privy council to make the necessary alterations from time to time, referred only to the power of changing the name, as the title of any branch of the royal family might be altered, and did not extend to the power of exclusion all together. He believed there was no precedent to prove the queen of England had ever been left out of the Liturgy. Having shown that in a legal construction of the act ministers were not warranted in leaving out her majesty's name, he next came to consider what possible injury could ensue from supplying the omission? It would satisfy her majesty's scruples, without derogating from the dignity of the monarch. He did not blame ministers for leaving the queen's name out of the Liturgy, for they did not know but it might be their duty to prefer charges against her. So far he gave them credit; but if the time had now arrived at which either policy or other motives prevented the prosecution of those
1279
Sir Francis Burdett
said, it was not his intention to go over any of those topics which had been urged by other hon. members with much greater ability than he possessed. It was his wish to approach this question with an unprejudiced mind; and. while he claimed justice for that party which stood most in need of justice, he was anxious not to say any thing that might be construed into a want of respect for the Crown on this very painful occasion. The hon. member for Bramber had, in his opinion, taken a very erroneous view of the question. That hon. member had declared that the House must either agree to his proposition, or to some other conciliatory resolution of a similar nature, or else go into the immediate consideration of the contents of the green bag. He dissented entirely from the hon. member for Bramber. So far was he from thinking that the House was reduced to such a dilemma, that it did not appear to him that there was any possibility, after all that had been said, even by his majesty's ministers themselves, that the House, consistently with a regard to its own character, to the dignity of the Crown, to the respect due to the family on the throne, and above all to the interests of the public, ever could consent that the green bag should be opened.
ex-parte
1280
logicé
logicé
1281
logicé
vestigia nulla retrorsum.
1282
1283
1284
in terrorem,
1285
1286
1287
pro tanto
1288
"To the liege lord of my dear native land
I owe a subject's homage; yet even him
And his high arbitration I'd regret.
Within my bosom dwells another lord—
HONOUR—sole judge and umpire, of itself!"
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
Mr. Canning
began by declaring that, however much provoked by the speech which had been just delivered, he should abstain on the present occasion from entering into the lists with the hon. baronet, more out of respect to the real subject matter of the debate, which he thought ought not to be mixed with topics of personal vituperation and party invective, than (as he hoped the House would do him the justice to acknowledge) from any habitual indisposition to accept a challenge in debate when charged with want of principle, or with inconsistency of practice. He felt it his duty to recall the attention of the House to the much more interesting considerations involved in the motion before them.
1298
1299
1300
1301
1302
l.
1303
l.
income.
1304
1305
1306
1307
Mr. Tierney
observed, that as the better part of valour was discretion, the right hon. gentleman had thought fit to postpone his defence of ministers till the effect of the hon. baronet's speech had worn away. The right hon. gentleman had said, that ministers were not afraid to meet either boisterous accusers or clamorous cheers; but never had so golden an opportunity of vindication as the present been neglected. If a speech which could not fail to excite the interest of
1308
1309
salvo honore;
1310
Mr. Brougham,
in explanation, observed, that the noble lord had misunderstood what he had stated on a former occasion respecting the Liturgy. A question had been started as to her majesty's title of queen. He had then stated, that havingher name in the Liturgy, or receiving addresses, were trifles light as air; for queen she was, and queen she must be. It was in this way, in comparison with her general rights, that he spoke lightly of the omission of her name in the Liturgy, and not at all with regard to that proceeding considered in itself. He much regretted the ground on which ministers had now placed the omission of her majesty's name. With regard to the return of her majesty, it was true he had advised her to suspend her journey until a courier could have been sent to London and return. Whether that advice was right or wrong, he trusted the House and the country would suspend their opinion until he could explain the grounds on which it was given. He never advised her majesty to refrain altogether from coming to this country. Had the negotiation on the return of the courier failed, it would then have been for him to consider what further advice he ought to have given. Much had been said about her majesty's advisers. He confidently believed that the only adviser of the step her majesty had taken in coming to this country was herself. It was a step which reflected infinite honour on his illustrious client. It could not have come so well from her legal advisers as it did
1311
Mr. Hutchinson
then rose, but the impatience of the House long prevented him from being heard. He observed, that if he had rightly understood the hon. and learned gentleman, he had said, that he was ignorant of the capacity in which lord Hutchinson appeared at St. Omer's.
Mr. Brougham
here interrupted the hon. member, in order to explain that what he had said was, that he had only recently learned that lord Hutchinson had received no instructions.
Mr. Hutchinson
declared, that although this might be the case, he was confident that when all the circumstances were disclosed, they would reflect additional lustre on the already high and proud reputation of his noble relative. Both he and his noble relation were perfectly willing to join in those humane and honourable feelings which had been expressed with so much eloquence that night. Lord Hutchinson had placed himself in a most painful situation, with the view of preventing a great public mischief, and if the queen had not been most wretchedly advised, he would have succeeded in that object.—This would, he was satisfied, fully appear
1312
Mr. Denman
assured the hon. gentleman he had not the slightest intention of offering a single observation reflecting upon the deservedly eminent character of his noble relative.
Mr. Brougham
was hardly more surprised at the late declaration that the noble lord had acted without the authority of his majesty's ministers, than at the address of his hon. friend who had just sat down. So far from imputing dishonourable conduct to the noble lord, he had put in the same claim for him that he had for himself, and had voluntarily offered to vindicate his conduct. Whether such vindication could have rendered that of the hon. gentleman superfluous, it would not be for him to determine.
Sir Thomas Acland
supported the motion, and expressed his opinion that the original omission of the queen's name from the Liturgy was most useless and improper.
Mr. Wilberforce
replied. In allusion to the charge or insinuation that he had any understanding with ministers in bringing this question forward, he solemnly disclaimed it, and conceived that his long political life might have secured him against such a suspicion. He had carefully looked for any means by which he could effect his purpose—that of adjusting this unhappy
1313
Lord Castlereagh,
in explanation, said, that his hon. friend had expatiated more strongly on his reasoning than any thing which he had stated would warrant. He had repeatedly declared, that the decision on the Liturgy had been taken by ministers, in contemplation of the charges of which they were at that time in possession. But he never had said that ministers came to that decision for the purpose of fixing a stigma on the royal personage. He had stated that they agreed in the measure for the purpose of avoiding a stigma [A laugh.] It was quite astonishing to see how eager gentlemen opposite were to arrive at their favourite conclusion, which was, to prevent all accommodation; but they could neither deceive the House nor the country [Order, order.] It was impossible not to be thrown out of one's natural bias of temper under such circumstances. He admitted that if the name of the duke of York had been placed in the Liturgy, and that of the queen excluded, it would have been a stigma. But, in the way in which it was done, it was that species of neutral measure which could not be considered a stigma. He did not mean to say that it placed her majesty in the same situation as if she had been specifically included in the prayer, or that it was a situation in which ministers, if those grave charges had not been preferred against her, would have found themselves justified in placing her. But, having heard those charges, they could not act otherwise than they had done, without placing themselves in
1314
The question "That the words proposed to be left out, stand part of the question," was then put and agreed to. The main question being then put, the House divided: Ayes, 391; Noes, 124. The Speaker said, that from the precedents in the Journals, it appeared, that when an address was voted to any of the royal family, it was customary, if any of their officers were members of that House, for the address to be conveyed by them. Mr. Brougham objected to be one of those who went up with the resolutions to her majesty, as it might so happen, that he might hereafter feel it his duty, as one of her majesty's advisers, to advise her not to act upon those resolutions. Mr. Denman declined waiting on her majesty with the resolutions, for the same reason. But he trusted, that however they might be conveyed, it would be in the most respectful manner. It was then ordered that the said resolution be laid before her majesty, and that Mr. Wilberforce, Mr. Stuart Wortley, sir Thomas Acland, and Mr. Bankes, do attend her majesty therewith. At five o'clock in the morning, the House adjourned.
List of the Minority.
Althorp, viscount
Coussmaker, G.
Allen, John H.
Crompton, Saml.
Anson, sir G.
Claughton, Thos.
Anson, hon. G.
Creevey, Thos.
Aubrey, sir John
Denison, Wm.
Barham, J. F.
Denman, Thos.
Barham, John
Duncannon, vise.
Baring, Alex.
Ebrington, viscount
Barrett, S. M.
Ellice, E.
Beaumont, T. P.
Farrand, R.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Fox, G. Lane
Benyon, Ben.
Fergusson, sir R.
Bernal, Ralph
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Birch, Jos.
Fitzroy, lord C.
Bright, H.
Fitzroy, lord J.
Brougham, H.
Folkestone, vise.
Browne, Dom.
Graham, Sandford
Burdett, sir F.
Graham, J. R. G.
Bury, vise.
Griffiths, J. W.
Byng, George
Guise, sir W.
Calcraft, J. H.
Grenfell, Pascoe
Calvert, C.
Gurney, R. H.
Campbell, hon. J.
Glenarchy, lord
Carew, R. S.
Howard, hon. W.
Carter, John
Hamilton, lord A.
Cavendish, lord G.
Harvey, D. W.
Clifton, vise.
Heathcote, G.
Coke, T. W.
Hill, lord A.
Coke,T. W. jun.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Colborne,N.R.
Honywood, W. P.
1315
Hornby, E.
Power, Rd.
Hughes, W. L.
Price, Rt.
Hughes, col.
Prittie, hon. F. A.
Hume, Jos.
Pym, Francis
Hurst, R.
Rickford, Wm.
Hutchinson, hon. C.
Ricardo, David
Haldimand, Wm.
Robarts, Abr.
James, Wm.
Robarts, George
Kennedy, T. F.
Robinson, sir G.
Lennard, T.
Rowley, sir W.
Lamb, hon. W.
Russell, G.
Lambton, J. G.
Stanley, lord
Lemon, sir W.
Smith, hon. Robt.
Lloyd, sir Ed.
Scarlett, James
Lloyd, J. M.
Seudamore, R.
Macdonald, J.
Sefton, earl
Mackintosh, sir J.
Stewart, Wm.
Martin, John
Stuart, lord J.
Mildmay, P. St J.
Sykes, Dan.
Monck, J. B.
Taylor, M. A.
Moore, Peter
Tierney, rt. hon. G.
Mahon, hon. S.
Warre, J. A.
Nugent, lord
Webbe, E.
Ord, Wm.
Wharton, John
Osborne, lord F.
Whitbread, W. H.
Ossulston, vise.
Whitbread, Sam.
Palmer, col.
Wilkins, Walter
Palmer, C. F.
Williams, W.
Pares, Thos.
Wilson, sir Robert
Pelham, hon. C. A.
Winnington, sir T.
Peirse, Henry
Wood, alderman
Philips, George
Wyvill, M.
Philips, G.jun.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, June 23, 1820.
THE QUEEN.]
Earl Grey
was sorry that the noble lord at the head of his majesty's government was absent, as he wished to ask him a question on the subject of that most unfortunate business which had so long occupied the attention of parliament and the public. What he would have inquired, had the noble lord been present, was, whether he meant to abide by his intention of allowing the sittings of the secret committee to take place on Tuesday next, if no amicable adjustment, or rather no arrangement of the differences, should then have taken place. If the noble lord did on Monday bring forward any proposition, he should, in the first place, reserve himself for its consideration. If, on the contrary, the noble lord intended to make no proposal to the House on that day, but should act on his declaration of yesterday, namely, to allow the committee to meet on Tuesday if an adjustment was not concluded by Monday, he should think it his duty on the latter day to call their lordships' attention to circumstances which had taken place, by which
1316
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, June 23, 1820.
LABOURERS WAGES BILL.]
Mr. Littleton moved the second reading of this bill, and briefly explained the object of the measure. Mr. Cripps, Mr. Davenport, and alderman Wood, spoke in favour of the bill; and Mr. Hume objected to it, as interfering between master and man. Mr. Baring would have been inclined to oppose the bill, if the country had been in a very different and more quiet state. Under the present circumstances he should support it. Mr. John Smith supported the bill. Colonel Wood opposed it; and was desirous to see all restrictive acts of this character abolished. After a few words from Mr. Wrottesley, lord Stanley, and Mr. Lockhart, in favour of
1317
THE QUEEN.]
Mr. Brougham
trusted the House would allow him to supply an omission which he had last night made in the course of his speech, and which had only been brought to his recollection by her majesty in the course of this morning. It had been objected by the noble lord last night, that the introduction of the question of the Liturgy had been an afterthought on the part of her majesty's advisers. Now, he felt himself bound, in justice to the queen, to state, that the moment her majesty, at her then residence abroad, found, from the gazette, that her name was erased from the Liturgy, she instantly wrote to one of his majesty's ministers*, complaining of the injustice of
*
"
Rome, March
"The Queen wishes to be informed, through the medium of lord Liverpool, first minister to the king, for what reason or motive the queen's name is left out of the general prayers in England, with a view to prevent all her subjects from paying her such respect as is due to her. And it is an equally great omission towards the king, that his consort queen should be obliged to submit to such great neglect, as if the archbishop was in perfect ignorance of the real existence of the queen Caroline of England. The queen is desirous that lord Liverpool should communicate this letter to the archbishop of Canterbury. Lord Liverpool will with difficulty believe how much the queen was surprised at this first act of cruel tyranny towards her; since she had been informed through the newspapers of the 22nd of February, that in the course of the debates in the House of Commons, lord Castlereagh, one of his best friends, assured the queen's attorney-general, that the king's servants would not use towards they queen any inattention or harshness. And after that speech of lord Castlereagh, the queen is surprised to find her name left Out of the Liturgy as if she no longer existed in this World. The queen trusts, before she arrives in England, these matters will be corrected, and that she will receive a satisfactory answer from lord Liverpool. "CAROLINE, Queen."
1318
Lord Castlereagh
perfectly recollected that the letter alluded to had been received by a noble friend of his. He wished, at the same time to observe, that when he spoke of the Liturgy having been introduced by her majesty's advisers as an after-thought, he meant not to insinuate that her majesty had not thought of it: his object was to show that it was not, in the first instance, propounded to his majesty's servants as a principal ground of objection. While he was on his legs, he wished to suggest the propriety of the House sitting to-morrow, in order to receive her majesty's answer; not for the purpose of deliberating upon it, but in order that gentlemen might be in possession of it previously to any discussion.
Mr. Brougham
said, that nothing could be more convenient than such a proceeding, provided no discussion was to take place. He wished here to state, that in consequence of the late hour to which parliament sat last night, as well as from the indisposition under which he laboured, he was unable to make any communication to her majesty before three o'clock to-day. This having been the case, her majesty was unable to fix any earlier hour than eleven o'clock to-morrow for receiving the, deputation.
Mr. Denman
said, that the letter of her majesty, complaining of the omission Of her name in the Liturgy, had been written on the 16th March, and received here on the 29th. Of this letter he knew nothing, until informed of it by her majesty this morning.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Saturday, June 24, 1820.
The House met at the usual hour. Curiosity to hear her majesty's answer to the resolution of the House of Commons attracted a greater assemblage of members than we ever, before witnessed on a Saturday. There could not be fewer than 300 members present.
PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.]
Mr. Lambton
begged the indulgence of the House for a few minutes. A motion of his, which he was pledged to his consti-
1319
EDUCATION OF THE POOR.]
Mr. Brougham
said, he stood in the same situation as his hon. friend who had just sat down. His motion respecting the Education of the Poor stood also for Tuesday. He could not, however, when he considered the great importance of the subject, and that, if the business of the country was allowed to yield to circumstances which might arise like those his hon. friend had alluded to, the public must eventually be sufferers to a deplorable extent, bring himself to postpone his motion beyond the appointed day. He had always foreseen that the momentous proceedings which were about to take place, would be attended with consequences such as the hon. member for Durham and himself referred to. He saw no alternative, however, but that of persisting in the course he now stated, and suggesting to the House the propriety, during the progress of the interesting discussions in which it was about to be engaged, of setting apart particular days for attending to the regular business of the country.
EXCHEQUER COURT OF SCOTLAND.]
Lord A. Hamilton
begged to state, that one of the barons of the Scotch exchequer, called the English baron, had lately died. It was therefore his intention to move, on an early day, that the place just vacated should not be filled up, but that, agreeably to the recommendation of the committee on that subject, the barons of the Scotch exchequer should remain permanently at their present number.
Lord Castlereagh
informed the noble lord, that his majesty's government did not intend to make any appointment in the place of the late Scotch baron to whom he alluded.
THE QUEEN'S ANSWER TO THE RESOLUTIONS OF THE HOUSE.]
Mr. Wilber-
1320
"I am bound to receive with gratitude every attempt on the part of the House of Commons to interpose its high mediation for the purpose of healing those unhappy differences in the royal family, which no person has so much reason to deplore as myself; and with perfect truth I can declare, that an entire reconcilement of those differences, effected by the authority of parliament on principles consistent with the honour and dignity of all the parties, is still the object dearest to my heart.
"I cannot refrain from expressing my deep sense of the affectionate language of these resolutions. It shows the House of Commons to be the faithful representative of that generous people, to whom I owe a debt of gratitude that can never be repaid. I am sensible too that I expose myself to the risk of displeasing those who may soon be the judges of my conduct. But I trust to their candour, and their sense of honour, confident that they will enter into the feelings which alone influence my determination.
"It would ill become me to question the power of parliament, or the mode in which it may at any time be exercised. But however strongly I may feel the necessity of submitting to its authority, the question whether I will make myself a party to any measure proposed, must be decided by my own feelings and conscience, and by them alone.
"As a subject of the state, I shall bow with deference, and, if possible, without a murmur, to every act of the sovereign authority. But as an accused and injured queen, I owe it to the king, to myself, and to all my fellow-subjects, not to consent to the sacrifice of any essential privilege, or withdraw my appeal to those principles of public justice, which are alike the safeguard of the highest and the humblest individual."
MILAN COMMISSION.]
General Fergusson
said;—As we are now about to
1321
Lord Castlereagh:
—I hope the hon. and gallant general will excuse me on the present occasion for reminding him, that, when we agreed to meet today, it was specifically understood by my hon. friend opposite (Mr. Wilberforce), and I believe by others, that we were not to meet for discussion, but merely to receive the queen's answer. As we are to enter upon this subject on Monday, I hope it will not be expected of me now to say one word that can lead to premature discussion. I must therefore decline answering the hon. and gallant general's question at the present moment.
Mr. M. A. Taylor
protested against the doctrine laid down by the noble lord, that his agreement with any hon. member was to be admitted as a bar to any inquiry which others might think proper to make. The question put by his hon. friend was a very proper one, and one to which the House had a right to expect an answer, although the noble lord need not answer it, certainly, unless he chose. But the sooner it was answered the better. The Milan commission must either have been the act of government, or have arisen out of underhand advice, to which the noble lord and his colleagues had found themselves obliged to truckle. If the noble lord and his colleagues thought these were acts that ought not to have taken place, they should gravely and respectfully have advised his majesty against them; and if their advice had been rejected, they ought immediately to have resigned their places to others [a laugh]. He did assure the gentlemen who had just indicated their feelings, that he spoke disinterestedly; for, so far from having a wish that his friends or the gentlemen who surrounded
1322
Sir R. Wilson
did not wish to provoke discussion, but he felt it necessary to ask the noble lord if the adjourned debate on the king's message would be resumed on Monday, or if it was intended by ministers to insist on the appointment of a secret committee? He asked for the purpose of obtaining information for his constituents, who were anxious to seize the opportunity, if any should offer, to express their objections to that mode of proceeding, by way of petition to the House.
Lord Castlereagh
declined giving any answer to any farther question.
Mr. Martin
said, it was highly indecorous to be thus putting questions to the noble lord, especially when it was known to be the feeling of the House that there ought to be no discussion upon the subject at present.
The House then adjourned.
1323
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, June 26, 1820.
COMMITMENT FOR LIBEL—PETITION OF MR. BUTT.]
Earl Grey
presented a petition from JR. G. Butt, stating his having brought an action against sir N. Conant for false imprisonment, in committing him on a charge of libel before any indictment found or information filed, and that the judges had decided the point against him; he therefore complained to the House, and prayed relief, &c. His lordship, in presenting the petition, adverted to what he had formerly said upon the subject of the power assumed, or, he would rather say, usurped by magistrates, of judging of the nature of libel, by committing on charges for that alleged offence, without any indictment being found or information filed. To the opinion he then expressed, he still adhered, considering, as he did, such a practice to be a departure from the ancient laws of the land, and to be contrary to the principles of the constitution.
The Lord Chancellor
observed, that the judges had given it as their opinion, that there was no ground of complaint in the petitioner's case. With regard to the motion made by the noble earl on a former occasion, his objections to the power of the magistrates were, at the time they were made, deserving of every attention; but was fully of opinion, that they were not founded in law.
Lord Erskine
said, he had on a former occasion, when his noble friend brought the subject before the House, stated that he considered arrest for libel, before an indictment was found, to be illegal; and he still maintained that opinion.
Ordered to lie on the table.
PETITION FROM THE QUEEN.]
Lord Dacre
rose. He said he had been requested to present a petition which he felt it to be his duty to offer to their lordships, inasmuch as it related to matters of great importance, and was worded with propriety. The petition was from her majesty, and it had been hoped that that illustrious person would have been enabled to place it on the table through a medium better calculated to give weight to the proceeding—namely, through that of the highest authority in the House. As, however, that expectation had not been realized, it fell to his lot to call their lordships attention to the subject. In this petition
1324
1325
The Lord Chancellor
had no objection to the petition being laid on the table, but thought it necessary to say a few words in consequence of what had fallen from the noble lord who presented it. He felt that he had, as a peer, duties to perform to every subject of the realm; but in the situation in which he stood he knew that he had also one great duty to perform to that House. He declared, upon his honour, that when he declined to present the petition he entertained no objection to its being submitted to the consideration of the House, but it appeared to him better that it should be presented by any other noble lord than by himself. A due regard to the situation in which he stood induced him to pause, when called upon to present this petition. He had not, however, three minutes for the consideration of the question. He had certainly taken great pains to learn what was the proper mode of proceeding in such a case, but no light could be derived from any thing found in the Journals. He had on a former occasion refused to present a letter
1326
Earl Grey
was sensible that no person was more disposed on every occasion to discharge his duty to the House and the country conscientiously than the noble and learned lord. That no motives but such as arose from the consideration of his duty could have prevented the noble lord from presenting the petition he was well convinced; but the noble and learned lord must allow him to think, that the view he had taken of his situation was an erroneous one. That his sitting on that woolsack gave him different duties with respect to applications of this kind from any other noble lord was what he could not admit. He apprehended that there was no distinction of the nature of that which the noble lord endeavoured to set up. For his part, feeling that the doors of that House ought always, in some way or other, to be open to every person who complained of a denial of justice, had that petition been offered to him he would not have thought it necessary to take three minutes to consider the propriety of submitting it to the consideration of their lordships; but after satisfying himself that it was couched in proper language, should have thought himself bound to present it. The noble and learned lord had formed, doubtless most conscientiously, a different opinion; but that opinion, he must contend, was founded on a mistaken view of the noble and learned lord's situation. He could not help making these observations on this subject; for it was important
1327
The Lord Chancellor
had no desire to prolong the discussion, but wished that the noble lord, and others who concurred with him would lay down some course which he could follow. Notwithstanding all that the noble lord had said, he considered that duties were imposed on him very different from those which the great majority of their lordships had to perform. He was not aware that any similar petition had ever been presented; but, as he had said, he had no objection to its being submitted to the House.
Lord Holland
concurred with his noble friend. The duties of the noble and learned lord, in rising and speaking from that wool-sack, differed in no respect from those of any other peer of parliament. His duties in that House were not to be regulated by any other duties. While he sat there he was bound to consider himself only as a member of that House. It was a doctrine of great importance, that nothing coming from him was to be considered as having greater weight or authority than if it came from any other peer. His conduct therefore was not to be regulated by other motives than those which regulated that of any other member of that assembly. They were all peers, and no individual among them could address the House with any greater authority than that which belonged to his character. The privileges of the House would indeed be materially abridged, were it to be presumed that any man among them could, by what he individually did, bind that House. There could, therefore, be no objection to the noble and learned lord's presenting the petition, which would not have been equally an objection on the part of any other noble lord. There might be a difficulty in finding precedents for the present case, and he had no doubt that the journals had, as the noble and learned lord said, been searched in vain; but when there was no other mode in which the illustrious petitioner could apply than this, it was not reasonable to think that there could be any impropriety in presenting her petition. The noble and learned lord said that he had refused to present letter from her majesty; but that was quite a different case, as he might then have appeared as acting for the House. No such objection, however, could apply to the presenting of a petition.
1328
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that all their lordships were agreed as to the propriety of receiving the petition. He would receive it, not because there was any precedent for it, but because it was a clear principle of constitutional right that the applications of subjects, however high or however low, should be received by their lordships, in cases in which their interests were affected. The only question was, whether it should be received in a more solemn and formal manner than other applications; and as that could not be the case, it should be received in the usual way. He begged, however, to say a word or two on the plea of his noble and learned friend on the woolsack for refusing to present the petition, and what had fallen from the noble lords opposite on that subject. He admitted that their lordships were all equal in point of duties and privileges, and if the illustrious petitioner could not have access to the House but through one individual of their lordships, that individual should have presented it. But there were individual peers through whom it would be highly improper to present certain applications. Suppose, for instance, a petitioner were to request any of their lordships to present a petition against one of his own relations, could he not very properly decline, and request the petitioner to apply to some other quarter? To say, therefore, that any individual peer of parliament might not have particular reasons for declining to do certain duties which might be more properly done by others, and that, in the exercise of his discretion, I he might not decline those duties, would I be denying him his undoubted privilege. There might be petitions which, considered as a peer of parliament, he might have no objection to present; but, considered as holding a particular office, and exhibiting a particular character, he might be prevented from offering to the House. This was the case with his noble and learned friend. But his noble and learned friend might have another reason; he knew I that there was no precedent for this, and he did not think that, this being a new case, he ought to comply without deliberation. It was, therefore, more proper that it should come from any other member of the House. Any noble lord might say, that such a petition, though fit to be presented, might not be fit to be presented by him.
The Marquis of Lansdowne
perfectly agreed with a great part of what had fal-
1329
The Lord Chancellor
explained. He claimed all the privileges, and was willing to execute all the duties of the peerage; and desired it to be understood, that he would never refuse to present a petition, whether from the highest or the lowest subject, if consistent with what he thought his duties to the House He would not allow that he was acting from personal motives while he declined presenting a petition for which he had no precedent. He thought that the presenting of this petition was a strong measure, which he was not called upon to execute sitting where he did.
R.
1330
Mr. Brougham
began to address their lordships. He said he had the honour to attend their lordships as counsel for her majesty, the Queen, and he understood that he should now be heard in support of the petition which had just been read. It might perhaps have been more consistent with his duty if, feeling,
1331
ex parte
1332
1333
1334
1335
Mr. Denman
followed.—He said, that in advising this petition to be brought down, he did not think that he was guilty of any violation of the forms of the House, or that there was any thing in that proceeding derogatory from the dignity of her majesty. He could not suppose that there were any motives of a personal nature, or any considerations resulting either from effect or connexion, that would make it improper in him to request any peer to present this petition. Still less did he doubt whether it was competent to be received. It had, in fact been received, and therefore it was unnecessary for him to allude any further to the consideration of the mode in which it was presented. He apprehended that every one who was injured had a right to petition that House; and if a petition was to be excluded, it remained for those who opposed its reception to show the grounds of a proceeding so contrary to the justice of their lordships. As to the mode of the present application, he apprehended that her majesty, as the first subject in the realm, had right to petition or remonstrate in a case where her best interests, her honour, perhaps her life, were at their lordships' disposal. He was totally unable to define the anomalous character of the proceed-
1336
1337
"Some busy and insinuating rogue
"Some cogging, cozening slave to get some office,
"Hath devised this slander."
1338
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, June 26, 1820.
CRIMINAL LAWS.]
Sir James Mackintosh
rose for the purpose of shortly stating his intention to postpone the further progress of some of the bills he had introduced into parliament in amendment of the penal code of this country.—In consequence of a conversation which he had had with the law officers of die Crown, he was aware of their intention to oppose three of these bills; and in the present state of public business, and when the mind of every member was occupied so deeply in the consideration of one unfortunate question, he should think it ill-became him to press forward those bills which were so important to the country He entertained a reasonable hope that there would be time in the course of the present session to terminate the subject, but for the present he should only move the second of those bills on which he did not anticipate opposition. The Limitation of Forgeries bill, the Repeal of the Statute act relative to Larceny, and the Navigable Rivers Robbery bill, were the three on which he expected opposition. The other three he hoped his learned friend the attorney-general would allow to pass their second readings, leaving the discussion on them to take place in the committee, on the bringing up of the report.
The said bills were then read a second time.
KING'S MEWS.]
Mr. M. A. Taylor,
seeing an hon. friend of his in his place, begged to know whether it was the intention to re-open the king's Mews as a
1339
Mr. Huskisson
said, he was not able to give the hon. member any satisfactory information on the subject. The Mews was not in his department, but he understood that its being left open as a thoroughfare, was only by indulgence. He did not know whether it was or was not: to be re-opened.
Mr. M. A. Taylor
said, he did not presume that the public had a right of thoroughfare through the Mews; he was only anxious to know, whether any steps were to be taken to remedy the inconvenience to the public.
MOTION FOR A SECRET COMMITTEE ON THE PAPERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE QUEEN.]
The order of the day being read, for resuming the adjourned debate on the motion, made on the 7th instant, "That the Papers which were presented to the House be referred to a Select Committee,"
Lord Castlereagh
said, that in calling the attention of the House to the situation in which it was placed, after the proceedings which were had at the close of the last week, and particularly after what had occurred at the last meeting of the House, and considering also that the order of the day relative to his majesty's message stood for discussion that night, he must fairly own to the House what was his opinion of their present situation. After all the efforts which had been made, and to which, he trusted, the House would consider that his majesty's government had lent itself with the utmost readiness and anxiety, he thought that the House would now feel that every hope which could have entered into his mind at any time, and in whatever degree he might have ventured to entertain that hope (although he had always expressed himself with the utmost caution as to the final result) lie thought that the House must now consider that every effort which had been made on the part of his majesty's government, and, what was more, upon the part of parliament itself, with the view of effecting an adjustment of compromise, had
1340
1341
prima facie
prima facie
ex porte
1342
1343
1344
primá facie
1345
prima facie
prima facie
1346
1347
prima facie
ipso facto,
1348
1349
Mr. Brougham
said, he entirely, and from the bottom of his heart, concurred in the concluding observations of the noble lord; and he implored all sides of the House at that moment, at the commencement of an inquiry now inevitable, not to let the spirit or the voice of party inter-
1350
1351
tactique
1352
1353
1354
1355
ex parte,
1356
pro
con.
Colonel Palmer,
in offering himself to the notice of the House, was anxious to explain the motive of his conduct with respect to the question before it, and begged to be understood, in the vote he had given on the former night, to express no opinion whatever, as to the charges on the table; but without questioning the propriety of its decision, he could not concur in the resolution of the House, recommending to her majesty to make that concession which he could not, consistently with his own feelings, have made himself under the same circumstances.—If he thought that an inquiry into the charges would in any degree promote the honour or interests of the Crown, no individual could desire it more anxiously than himself; but it was from his conviction of the great arid inevitable injury that it threatened, and his perfect concurrence in the language of the resolution, that it must be derogatory to the honour of the Crown, and the dearest interests of the empire, that he considered it to be his bounden duty to oppose it. He considered such opposition to be still more the duty of those who voted for there-solution, who were bound not to express or act upon any opinion at variance with it. They had given her majesty credit for the justice of her feelings; and to persuade her to make the concession required, they assured her that it would not be considered as a wish on her part to avoid inquiry, or as proceeding from any motive whatever than a desire to comply with their wishes; but their bringing her to trial after this, would be a proof that
1357
1358
1359
Mr. Bathurst
said, he lamented the absence of the hon. and learned gentleman, though he knew he was called away by his duties, in another character, in another place. The appointment of a secret committee had been proposed because the subject of inquiry was of a most delicate nature, and because many circumstances might otherwise be divulged which would defeat the end of that inquiry. His noble friend had, however, now superseded this form of proceeding, by undertaking himself to bring forward some specific proposition. The House would know how-to defend itself against any charge of inconsistency in now entering upon inquiry after the expressions contained in their recent vote. It appeared to him that nothing could be more unfounded than such a charge. With respect to the assertion that ministers possessed no evidence that could support their case, he would put it to the general feeling of mankind, whether it was possible that any set of men could place, in the shape of a charge, and, what was much more, bring before parliament, matters of little or no importance? The hon. and learned gentleman had talked of the prejudices which would be excited against her majesty. In every judicial inquiry there was some prejudice excited. Whether the investigation preliminary to the specific charge were public or
1360
1361
Mr. Western
rose for the purpose of entering his protest against the motion of the noble lord, and, in doing so, he would shortly state the reasons that induced him to come to this determination. He protested against the motion, because the effect of such a vote would be to pledge the House, directly or indirectly, to an approval of the measures pursued by the noble lord, with a view to the projected inquiry. The sense of the whole country was distinctly and evidently opposed to such an inquiry, and the sentiments of the House, when the subject was mentioned on the first night, were shown to be distinctly and decidedly contrary to any investigation of this green-bag. The noble lord bad, he thought, drawn a very incorrect inference from the decision of that evening, as well as from the subsequent decision on the resolution of the hon. member for Bramber, for which he had voted in common with the majority of the House. When the noble lord made the original motion, he laid this green-bag on the table, and called on the House for immediate inquiry. The House, however, decided when an alternative was held forth that it ought to be adopted in preference. Why had not that alternative been properly followed up? Had not the whole country expressed a clear and decided opinion that the inquiry was not fit to be gone into? The country had adopted that opinion, for this plain reason, because it appeared that the inquiry, which was at first described to be of a criminal
1362
1363
1364
Mr. S. Whitbread
said, he objected entirely to the measures that had been pursued by ministers since her majesty's arrival in this country, and more particularly to the motion brought forward this day; because it appeared to him, that ministers, by proposing measure after measure, and scheme after scheme, were endeavouring to delude the House into some sort of sanction of what they had done. In opposing the resolution of his hon. friend the other night, he did so, not because he would interpose any bar to an amicable adjustment of their differences, but because, when that resolution was put into plain words, it amounted to this, that the queen should be requested to submit to a gross insult, which must have the effect of degrading her for ever. With the same feeling he now begged leave to second the amendment which had just been moved, and which, he felt no doubt, would be approved of by the country.
Mr. Tierney
said, the noble lord appeared to be in a more awkward situation than that in which he had been placed on a former occasion. He came forward apparently with the assumption, that whatever he proposed for adoption would be agreed to. He hoped the noble lord would find himself mistaken on the present occasion, as the subject was one of the most important that could be conceiv-
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
Mr. R. Martin
differed from the conclusion to which the right hon gentleman had arrived, when he declared that guilt would be proved against ministers, if they failed to establish the charges against the queen If government were satisfied of her innocence, he thought they were still bound to proceed with the charges in justice to her majesty. The ministers in this case he regarded as merely acting the part of the clerk of the Crown—they presumed no guilt—they merely laid the charges before the House that they might be met and refuted, while they in effect said to the accused party, "God send you a good deliverance." That the charges must now be proceeded with was clear, from, what had fallen from the right hon. gentleman himself, as be had demanded trial for her if she were guilty—acquittal if innocent. Under these circumstances the Crown must proceed to make out its. case He was not surprised at such a
1376
Lord Nugent
said, he agreed with the amendment of his hon. friend, because he did not think that the delay would, as an honourable member bad thought, put a stop to the proceedings altogether. He objected to. the delay proposed by the noble lord, because it was proposed upon grounds offensive to his majesty, highly offensive to the queen, and subversive of the principles of public justice.
1377
1378
Lord Milton
said, he could not but look upon the intended investigation as one pregnant with the most positive and absolute danger to the country. He thought, notwithstanding what had been hitherto done, that some means might be yet devised to spare the House and the country the pain which must necessarily arise from the disclosure of the alleged charges against her majesty. He said this the more because he did not think the House could be called upon to decide on charges except those of a public nature. He had listened attentively to the speech of the noble lord, and had expected that he would lay before the House such reasons as would justify them in instituting a public inquiry; but instead of that, he had been disappointed in seeing that the noble lord had not stated any thing in his speech to induce the House to advise such an investigation. The noble lord had spoken of the conflict between parties, but the noble lord did not propose that the inquiry should be entered upon on the ground of injury to public morals likely to ensue from the conduct of her majesty. From the silence of the noble lord on these points, he should be induced to suppose that the noble lord had proposed the inquiry upon private grounds, and not upon grounds of a public nature. If such were the motives which had induced the noble lord to call upon the House for a secret committee, he would implore the House to pause before they plunged the country into a state of danger which (after the humane, forcible, and philanthropic manner in which it had been pressed upon the House by the hon. member for Bramber), it would be absurd in him to describe. He would ask the House, whether it was wise or prudent, upon private grounds, to enter into
1379
1380
Mr. Wynn
said, he had felt it his duty to urge upon the House the necessity of catching at any thing which would be likely to adjust the present unhappy differences; but, unfortunately, the proposals of that House had been rejected, and they were now called upon to enter upon an inquiry. Differing, as he did, on many occasions, from those gentlemen who had spoken in opposition to the proposition of the noble lord, he nevertheless felt that the House would be guilty of great impropriety in agreeing to this adjournment. Let the House see how the case stood. A message, demanding the most solemn attention of the House, had been brought from the Crown, and the House had pledged itself to take that message into its immediate consideration. On the first day, the noble lord suggested the possibility of entering into some arrangement, and the House agreed to an adjournment for that purpose; but now the noble lord came and said, that he wished to bring the question before the House in another shape, and therefore requested an adjournment for that purpose. If ministers had brought down a message from the Crown, desiring the House to suspend their operations on the former message, the course to be pursued by the House would be clear; but, in the present case, he confessed he did not see how the House could suspend their operations, and allow the noble lord to bring the question under their consideration, in the way he had mentioned. If the secret committee had been appointed, and had not found that there was sufficient ground for inquiry, they might have felt it their duty to move for the censure of parliament, or perhaps they might have felt it their duty to impeach his majesty's ministers. He could not suppose that any man in his senses would come down to the House and prefer such serious charges, except on evidence which appeared,
prima facie
1381
prima facie
Mr. Stuart Wortley
said, that as his noble colleague bad clearly shown that the House was not reduced to the alternative of either withdrawing its support from the present advisers of the Crown or of proceeding immediately with the proposed inquiry, he did not feel it necessary to offer those remarks upon that subject which he certainly should have offered had it not been for the observations of his noble colleague. He would, however, assure his noble friend that though he supported the present administration on most occasions, from a conviction that the policy which they pursued was calculated to promote the best interests of the nation, he was still of opinion, that if the present unfortunate differences could be brought to a happy termination by their removal, they ought most unquestionably to be removed from their present
1382
1383
Mr. Hobhouse
said:—Mr. Speaker; I fear, Sir, that, as almost every topic has been exhausted and every argument used which may appear material to those who advocate the opinions which I venture to
1384
1385
sine quâ non,
1386
1387
1388
1389
Mr. Denman
said, that the only object of the queen was, to obtain an open public inquiry; that that was what her majesty distinctly applied for in her first communication to that House; and that that also was what she looked for in those terms of her answer to the resolutions of the House, where she spoke of an appeal to the public justice of the country. With respect to the motions before the House, as he and his colleague, in their address to the other House of Parliament that day had offered to submit the case of the queen to any mode of public inquiry which parliament might think proper to institute, he and his colleague felt it most becoming not to vote upon the present occasion. They were not, he begged it to be understood, at all adverse to inquiry; their only objection being to any secret investigation or private tribunal. But he could not help observing the new and singular grounds which were this night urged on the other side for prosecuting the proposed inquiry. The inquiry was, it seemed, now to be persisted in, not because her majesty had rejected the propositions made to her at St. Omer's, not because she had ventured to come to this country, not because the correspondence which had taken place respecting her in France had been published in the several journals, a, proceed-
1390
ex-parte
Mr. Western
stated, that if his motion was acceded to, it was his intention to follow it up with addresses to the king, and to her majesty also, the purpose of which would be, to promote a final and amicable adjustment upon this subject.
Mr. Wilberforce
expressed his regret that the advice of the House of Commons had been rejected, because he was convinced that if it had been followed, her
1391
1392
Mr. Scarlett
considered the question now before the House as one of the first importance to the nation. He presumed that the hon. gentleman who had preceded him thought so too; but he certainly was at a loss to know, whether his hon. friend intended to support or oppose the amendment. He imagined that it must be his intention to support it; for, deprecating as his hon. friend had justly done, a secret inquiry, as prejudicial to the national character and honour, he took it for granted that his hon. friend would vote for a motion which would probably preclude any inquiry at all. The real question, in fact, was, whether a secret committee was to be instituted, or whether it was to be abandoned altogether? As he could not concur in the idea of a secret committee at any stage of the proceedings, he thought it his duty to give his support to any motion which tended to render it unnecessary. Now, the amendment of his hon. friend went directly to do away with the green bag and to prevent any exposure of its contents. He called upon the House to recollect the feeling which they had expressed when the first mention of these proceedings had been made to them. Such being, then their opinion, he asked what had since occurred to change it? An adjournment had been agreed to to give an opportunity for a reconciliation, which reconciliation had unfortunately not taken place. Though he
1393
1394
1395
Mr. W. Smith
rose amidst general cries of question! As soon as the noise had in some degree subsided, the hon. member expressed his concurrence in the sentiment laid down by his hon. and learned friend, that this question was not a party question. He had voted for the address proposed by his hon. friend last week, because he was willing to adopt any mea-
1396
Mr. Marryat
began by observing, that if revolutions
were
1397
1398
Mr. Brougham,
in a brief explanation, said, that all the delay wanted on the part of the queen was, a sufficient time to produce evidence to disprove the accusations against her. The import of the words in the negotiation which settled the basis on the ground that the one side should retract, and the other side admit nothing, had, he conceived, been mistaken. It had been, assumed that they meant that there should be no concession on either side; but if that had been their meaning, it would have been quite ridiculous for the commissioners to have met five times afterwards to endeavour to settle terms. All that they implied was, that neither of the parties should concede any thing inconsistent with their honour, but that the queen might concede, or the king, or ministers retract or concede any other points on which they might otherwise be disposed to insist.
The question being put, "That the words 'Friday seven-night' stand part of the question," the House divided: Ayes, 195; Noes, 100. The main question was then put and carried.
List of the Minority.
Aubrey, sir John
Barrett, A.
Althorp,; viscount
Bright, Henry.
Abercromby, hon.
Bernal, H.
Allan. J. H.
Byng, George
1399
Benett, J.
Guise, sir W.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Grenfell, Pascoe
Barham, J. F.
Graham, Sandford
Boughey, sir J. F.
Graham, J. R. G.
Benyon, Benj.
Gordon, Robt.
Beaumont, T. P.
Gaskell, B.
Bury, lord
Griffiths, J. W.
Calcraft, J.
Hurst, Robt.
Calcraft, J. jun.
Hume, J.
Creevey, Thos.
Haldimand, W.
Crespigny, sir W. De
Hill, lord A.
Cockburn, Ridley
Harbord, hon. E.
Calvert, C.
Harvey, D. W.
Cavendish, lord G.
Heron, sir R.
Coke, T.W. jun.
Honywood, W. P.
Carter, John
Hobhouse, J. C.
Clifton, viscount
Jervoise, G. P.
Chamberlayne, W.
Kennedy, T. F.
Davies, J. H.
Lemon, sir W.
Ebrington, viscount
Langston, J. H.
Ellice, E.
Lloyd, sir W.
Folkestone, visc.
Lushington, Steph.
Fergusson, sir R.
Lennard, J. B.
Gurney, R. H.
Martin, J.
Glenarchy, lord
Mackintosh, sir J.
1400
Macdonald, J.
Robarts, A. W.
Moore, Abraham
Robarts, G.
Moore, Peter
Ricardo, D.
Milton, lord
Russell, lord W.
Monck, J. B.
Russell, lord John
Mostyn, sir T.
Smith, Wm.
Marjoribanks, E.
Sefton, earl
Newport, rt. hon.sir J.
Scudamore, R.
Noel, sir G.
Scarlett, James
Ossulston, lord
Sykes, Dan.
O'Callaghan, T.
Tavistock, marq.
Pares, Thos.
Tynte, Chas.
Pryse, P.
Tierney, rt. hon. G.
Pryce, R.
Taylor, M. A.
Pelham, hon. C. A.
Townshend, lord C.
Philips, George
Wilson, sir Robt.
Philips, Geo. jun.
Wood, alderman
Palmer, C. F.
Webbe, Ed.
Power, Rich.
Whitbread, S. C.
Parnell, sir H.
Wyvill, G.
Peirse, Henry
TELLERS.
Proby, hon. G. L.
Western, C. C.
Ramsay, sir A.
Nugent, lord
Rumbold, C. E.
INDEX TO VOL. I.
NEW SERIES.
INDEX TO DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
A
Agricultural Distress, 521.
Athanasian Creed; Petition of Rev. Mr. Jones, 26, 305.
B
Banks of Ireland; Failures of, 798.
C
Civil List; 86, 523, 628.
Commercial Distress, 388.
E
Employment for the Poor, 395.
F
Foreign Trade of the Country, 546.
I
Insolvent Debtors, 104, 1096.
J
Jones, Rev. Mr.; Petition of, 26, 305.
I
Irish Banks; Failures of, 798.
K
King's Speech at the Opening of the Session, 11.
King's Message respecting the Arrival of the Queen, 870.
M
Marriage Act; Royal, 1007, 1099.
Mutiny Bill, 1198.
P
Poor; Means of providing Employment for the, 395.
Q
Queen, The, 870, 886, 985, 1034, 1097, 1136, 1206, 1315, 1323,
R
Royal Marriage Act, 1007, 1099.
S
Scotch Peers, 1044.
Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen, 886, 985, 1034, 1097, 1136, 1206, 1315, 1323.
Silver, Price of, 85.
Small Debts Recovery Bill, 742.
Sunday Newspapers, 545.
T
Trade of the Country; Foreign, 546.
INDEX TO DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
A
African Company, 634, 1124.
Agricultural Distress, 329, 533, 635, 705.
Aldborough Election,
539.
Alien Bill, 774, 999.
Antrobus, Mr.; his Qualification, 539.
Army Estimates, 804, 821, 882.
B
Bank of England Accounts, 1046.
Bankrupt Laws, 1008.
Barracks, 1112.
Beckwith, W. A., Mr., 1036.
Boston Election, 544, 601.
Breach of Privilege, 520, 601, 904.
British Museum, 626.
Boroughbridge Election, 902.
Budget, The, 1161.
C
Callington Election, 1037.
Catholic Question, 39.
Cato-street Conspiracy, 54, 242.
Choice of a Speaker, 2.
Civil List Bill, 63, 73, 75, 196, 333, 343, 461, 475.
Commercial Restrictions, 165, 338, 424, 478, 744.
Contempt of Court, 693.
Cork Harbour Bill, 1035.
Court of Judicature in Wales, 745.
Court of Exchequer in Scotland, 48, 95, 347, 1319.
Courts of Justice; Publication of Proceedings in, 521.
Criminal Laws, 227, 480, 1333.
Crown 5 Revenues of the, 45.
D
Drogheda Election, 530.
Droits of the Crown and Admiralty, 43, 105.
E
East India Company's Volunteers Bill, 1102.
Education of the Poor, 39, 1319.
Edwards, George; Conduct of, 54, 242.
Excise Prosecutions, 1042.
Exchequer Bills, 297, 694.
F
Foreign Trade, 863.
G
Galway Election, 1039.
Gibraltar, 96.
Grampousd Disfranchisement Bill, 39, 237, 480, 863.
Grattan, Mr., 1054.
H
Hastings, Marquis of, 38.
I
Insolveut Debtors Bill, 53, 605, 868, 1041.
Irish Paupers Bill, 885, 1051.
Irish Protecting Duties, 802, 1004, 1032.
Irish Still Fines Bill, 904.
Irish Bank Failures, 1053, 1105.
Irish Ten per Cent Union Duties, 1066.
K
King's Bench Proceedings Bill, 1189.
King's Speech at the Opening of the Session, 26, 40, 47.
King's Message respecting the Arrival of the Queen, 870.
King's Mews, 1333.
L
Labourers Wages Bill, 768, 1316.
Lancaster Gaol, 702.
Landlords and Tenants Bill, 1000.
Linen Bounties, 771.
Loan, 1022.
London Bridge, 91.
M
Machinery; Use of, 105.
Manchester; Transactions at, 460, 904.
Manufacturing Distress, 744.
Marriage Act Amendment Bill, 800.
Milan Commission, 1320.
Military Expenditure of the Country, 432.
Military Insurbordination, 1147, 1187.
Miscellaneous Services, 1112, 1179.
Mutiny Bill, 1072.
N
Navy Estimates, 459, 1010.
O
Oldham; Conduct of the Military at, 334, 347.
Ordnance Estimates, 805, 882.
P
Parliamentary Reform, 40, 332, 632, 843, 881, 1318.
Patents; Specifications of, 1052.
Poor; Education of the, 39, 1319.
Portsmouth Election, 862.
Post Office; New, 293.
Protecting Duties, 802, 1004, 1032.
Privy Purse, 43.
Prisoners for Contempt of Court, 693.
Publication of Proceedings in Courts of Justice, 521.
Q
Qualification of Mr. Antrobus, 539.
Queen, The, 241, 870, 905, 906, 1008, 1039, 1103, 1160, 1185, 1202, 1213, 1317, 1319, 1339.
R
Reform of Parliament, 40, 332, 632, 643, 831, 1318.
Revenues of the Crown, 45.
S
Scotch Court of Exchequer, 48, 95, 547, 1319.
Scotch Representation, 40, 536.
Scotch Burghs, 94.
Secret Committee on the Papers relating to the Conduct of the Queen, 906, 1008, 1039, 1103, 1160, 1185, 1202, 1213, 1339.
Speaker; Choice of a, 2.
Stage Coach Drivers, 53.
Steam Engines and Finances,50.
Sunday Newspapers, 599.
T
Timber Duties, 800, 844, 845, 1180.
Trade; Bills for the Regulation of, 1050.
W
Wales; Court of Judicature in, 745.
Warden of the Fleet Prison—Breach of Privilege, 520, 601, 904.
Weights and Measures, 47.
Western Union Canal Bill, 345.
Wilful and Malicious Injuries Bill, 884.
Wool Tax, 72, 92, 165, 294, 612.
INDEX OF NAMES—HOUSE OF LORDS.
A
Auckland, Lord, 104.
C
Calthorpe, Lord, 388, 599.
Carnarvon, Earl of, 322, 328, 991.
Cathcart, Earl, 1044.
D
Dacre, Lord, 628, 1144, 1323.
Darnley, Earl of, 392, 529, 992, 1098, 1099, 1142, 1213.
Donoughmore, Earl of, 393, 899, 996.
E
Eldon, Lord,
see
Ellenborough, Lord, 596, 651, 996, 1240.
Erskine, Lord, 320, 392, 521, 523, 992, 1146, 1211, 1323.
Exeter, Bishop of [Dr. Pelham], 318.
G
Granville, Viscount, 13.
Grey, Earl, 1137, 1142, 1206, 1315, 1323, 1326.
Grosvenor, Earl, 18, 391, 392, 394, 545, 1096, 1198.
H
Harrowby, Earl of, 1139, 1142.
Holland, Lord, 26, 305, 328, 545, 886, 894, 901, 988, 1007, 1034, 1099, 1102, 1140, 1145, 1210, 1327.
Howard of Effingham, Lords, 17.
K
Kenyon, Lord, 545, 985, 987, 988.
King, Lord, 85, 90, 526.
L
Landaff, Bishop of [Dr. van Mildert], 328.
Lansdowne, Marquis of, 19, 86, 325, 89, 390, 392, 523, 546, 798, 799, 587, 893, 986, 998, 1098, 1137, 1443, 1328.
Lauderdale, Earl of, 392, 522, 546, 594, 799, 988, 1045,1145.
Liverpool, Earl of, 23, 86, 88, 389, 391, 393, 417, 523, 529, 565, 629, 799, 870, 886, 887, 891, 986, 991, 1034, 1097, 1098, 1102, 1136, 1137, 1143, 1201, 1206, 1208, 1328.
Lord Chancellor [Eldon], 321, 897, 1045, 1046, 1097, 1145, 1323, 1325, 1327, 1329.
M
Melville, Lord, 1044, 1045.
R
Redesdale, lord, 742.
Rolle, Lord, 1144.
Roseberry, Earl of, 1044.
Rosslyn, Earl of, 994.
S
Spencer, Earl, 1145, 1209.
Stanhope, Earl, 395, 422.
INDEX OF NAMES—HOUSE OF COMMONS.
A
Abercromby, Hon. James. 95, 96, 538, 541, 543, 868, 869, 1118.
Acland, Sir Thomas, 690, 983.
Allan, J. B., 758.
Althorp, Viscount, 54, 605, 611, 693, 1069.
Arbuthnot, Right hon. C., 1112, 1117, 1120, 1122.
Attorney General [Sir Robert Gifford], 268, 289, 520, 704, 1041, 1189.
B
Bagwell, Colonel, 1053.
Bankes, Henry, 251, 626, 720, 1275.
Barham, John Foster, 765, 835
Baring, Alexander, 93, 165, 195, 303, 304, 429, 474, 654, 691, 705, 713, 770, 861, 1050, 1168.
Barrett, S., 626.
Bathurst, Right Hon. Charles Bragge, 57, 158, 514, 540, 603, 766, 1359.
Beaumont, T. W. 187, 504, 875.
Becher, W. W., 1064.
Benett, John, 105, 235, 535, 676, 717.
Bennet, Hon. Henry Grey, 461, 693, 702, 801, 819, 833, 837, 871, 1112, 1130.
Binning, Lord, 96, 1102.
Boswell, Alexander, 1035.
Bourne, Sturges, 885, 1052.
Bright, Henry, 609, 710, 1041, 1076.
Brougham, Henry, 8, 39, 44, 49, 59, 71, 105, 138, 159, 209, 286, 339, 342, 604, 683, 692, 709, 713, 735, 880, 928, 969, 1009, 1040, 1041, 1185, 1186, 1205, 1229, 1248, 1310, 1312, 1317, 1319, 1349.
Burdett, Sir Francis, 36, 274, 285, 286, 292, 336, 1037, 1279.
Burrell, Walter, 715.
Butterworth, Joseph, 260.
Buxton, Thomas Powell, 982.
C
Calcraft, John, 75, 331, 456, 541, 543, 708,731, 882, 1119, 1123.
Calvert, Charles, 91.
Campbell, Frederick, 745, 768.
Canning, Right Hon. George, 62, 63, 65, 67, 127, 221, 235, 239, 278, 285, 286, 292, 504, 950, 1297.
Castlereagh, Viscount, 373, 466, 470, 476, 478, 489, 495, 520, 537, 605, 690, 692, 693, 722, 761, 774, 797, 803, 820, 873, 906, 984, 1008, 1039, 1040, 1053, 1060, 1071, 1103, 1111, 1160, 1185, 1202, 1245, 1245, 1248, 1313, 1318, 1321, 1339.
Chancellor of the Exchequer [Right Hon. Nicholas Vansittart], 42, 43, 47, 48, 63, 65, 67, 73, 74, 78, 101, 157, 198, 242, 301, 304, 336, 345, 539, 543, 618, 634, 694, 696, 699, 766, 771, 802, 818, 1004, 1019, 1022, 1025, 1033, 1070, 1105, 1115, 1118, 1161, 1169, 1176.
Chetwynd, George, 758, 1195.
Clerk, Sir George, 538.
Clive, Henry, 335, 337.
Cockburn, Sir George, 1010.
Coffin, Sir Isaac, 800, 845, 1017, 1036.
Colborne, N. R., 626.
Colthurst, Sir N., 1035, 1071.
Coke, T. W., 534, 681.
Copley, Sir John,
see
Corbett, P., 689.
Courtenay, William, 541, 544, 599, 701.
Creevey, Thomas, 753, 816, 875, 1121.
Cripps, Joseph, 347.
Curtis, Sir William, 91, 293, 846.
Curwen, John Christian, 329, 475, 534, 625, 668, 802, 1071.
D
Dalrymple, Colonel, 103.
Davenport, D., 984.
Davies, Colonel, 65, 432, 458, 830, 1082, 1115.
Denman, Thomas, 52. 264, 540, 542, 768, 868, 880, 1196, 1267, 1318, 1389.
Douglas, William, 186.
Dugdale, D. S., 338.
Dundas, Charles, 709.
Dundas Right Hon. W., 385.
E
Ellice, Edwards, 193, 431, 458, 683, 689, 700.
Fergusson, Sir Rowland, 539, 1320.
Finlay, Kilkman, 43, 424, 1008.
Fitzgerald, Vesey, 691, 802, 1005, 1053, 1063, 1069, 1093. 1110.
Folkestone, Viscount, 704.
Foster, John, 1006, 1109.
Fynes, Henry, 539, 543.
G
Gascoyne, Isaac, 330, 689, 712, 800, 844.
Gifford, Sir Robert,
see
Gilbert, Davies, 241, 510, 865.
Gipps, George, 689, 740.
Gordon, Robert, 634.
Gooch, T. 639, 984.
Goulburn, Henry, 102, 835.
Graham, Sir James, 1036.
Grant, Colonel, 458.
Grant, Right Hon. Charles, 467, 1061, 1110.
Grenfell, Pascoe, 182, 509, 695, 700, 1023, 1026, 1028, 1029, 1046, 1048, 1109, 1169.
H
Hamilton, Lord Archibald, 40, 48, 67, 94, 240, 242, 347, 369, 385, 536, 877, 11O8, 1187, 1203, 1259, 1319.
Hart, General, 804.
Harvey, Daniel Whittle, 477, 869, 1135.
Heron, Sir Robert, 343, 601.
Heygate, Alderman, 346, 690, 1030, 1176.
Hill, Sir George, 1108.
Hobhouse, John Cam, 255, 334, 460, 516, 521, 1084, 1133, 1134, 1383.
Holford, George, 1131.
Hume, Joseph. 58, 68, 75, 79, 82, 84, 96, 103, 261, 329, 343, 537, 770, 806, 819, 826, 882,883, 1013, 1020, 1030, 1032, 1071, 1102, 1112, 1117, 1129.
Huskisson, Right Hon. William, 79, 205, 332, 622, 677, 741, 1134, 1178.
Hutchinson, Hon. C. H., 803, 835, 1311.
K
Knatchbull, Sir Edward, 27, 984.
L
Lambton, John George, 40, 332, 600, 796, 867, 881, 1318.
Lewis, Frankland, 91, 661.
Littelton, E. J., 610, 768, 770, 1051, 1069.
Lockhart, J., 53, 693, 1130, 1193.
Long, Right Hon. Charles, 446.
Lord Advocate of Scotland, 95, 360.
Lushington, S. R.
Lushington, Dr., 703, 802,1108, 1125.
M
Maberly, John, 297, 304, 696, 699, 771, 773, 1174.
Macdonald, James, 149, 607.
Mackintosh, Sir James, 101, 139, 227, 236, 480, 770, 790, 1039, 1054, 1338.
Mansfield, John, 683, 1050.
Marryat, James, 147, 194, 845, 846, 1180.
Martin, Richard, 767, 983, 1094, 1246, 1375.
Martin, Sir T. Byam, 1013, 1016.
Maxwell, J., 710, 744.
Mills, Charles, 52.
Milton, Lord, 72, 82, 165, 187, 241, 337, 533, 536, 612, 665, 704, 821, 831, 1378.
Monck, J. B., 476, 718.
Moore, A., 517.
Moore, Peter, 346, 530, 543.
Mordaunt, Sir Charles, 52.
N
Newport, Sir John, 49, 96, 148, 304, 330, 369, 465, 466, 472, 511, 531, 706, 883, 886, 1033.
Nicholl, Sir John, 801.
Nolan, Michael, 1198.
Nugent, Lord, 331, 346, 825, 838, 1072, 1073, 1147, 1188, 1376.
O
Ommany, Sir F., 1017, 1021.
Onslow, Mr. Serjeant, 865, 1050.
P
Palmer, Fyshe, 826.
Palmer, Colonel, 1356.
Palmerston, Viscount, 447,804, 822, 837, 1078, 1188.
Parnell, Sir Henry, 64, 71, 73, 457, 470, 474, 1033, 1066.
Parnell, William, 767, 808, 885, 1051.
Peirse, John, 1048.
Philips, George, 185, 477, 478, 625.
Phillimore, Dr., 801.
Pole, Right Hon. W. Wellesley, 472.
R
Ricardo, David, 191, 197, 330, 535, 671, 803, 1005, 1023, 1031, 1049, 1172.
Ridley, Sir Matthew White, 332, 712, 1010, 1040.
Robinson, Right Hon. Frederick, 182, 549, 641, 714, 740, 772.
Russell, Lord John, 39, 82, 200, 237, 240, 480, 518, 754, S63, 867.
S
Scarlett, James, 704, 768, 1189, 1205, 1392.
Scott, Sir William, 2.
Sefton, Lord, 333.
Shaw, Robert, 472, 1072.
Smith, John, 302, 625, 698, 700, 1008, 1170.
Smith, William, 158, 513, 627, 707, 771, 1094, 1120, 1124, 1180.
Smith, R., 864.
Solicitor General [Sir John Copley], 787.
Speaker, The [Right Hon. Charles Manners Sutton], 5, 9, 10, 292, 532, 543, 603, 773, 774, 861, 1037.
Spooner, Mr., 340, 710.
Stanley, Lord, 479, 702.
Stewart, Sir J., 531, 904.
Stewart Wortley, J., 72, 165, 294, 620, 716, 983, 1228, 1381.
Sumner, Holme, 4, 47, 293, 503, 534, 635, 692, 706, 707, 730.
Sutton, Right Hon. Charles Manners,
see
T
Taylor, Michael Angelo, 50, 53, 862, 1321, 1338.
Temple, Earl, 719.
Tennyson, Charles, 801, 1000.
Tierney, Right Hon. George, 36, 43, 44, 66, 74, 75, 80, 154, 211, 225, 378, 468, 473, 495, 540, 602, 741, 973, 1017, 1186, 1204, 1246, 1307, 1364.
Trench, Colonel, 831.
V
Vansittart, Right Hon. Nicholas,
see
Vivian, Sir H., 1083.
W
Wall, C. B., 785.
Ward, Robert, 805, 810, 818, 882, 1114.
Warre, J. A., 204, 512.
Warren, Charles, 751, 1191.
Warrender, Sir George, 460, 1021.
Western, C. C, 617, 651, 1361.
Whitbread, S., 91, 702, 1364.
Wilberforce, William, 981, 1062, 1186, 1202, 1213, 1312, 1390.
Wilbraham, Bootle, 337, 338, 704.
Williams, William, 545, 1070, 1278.
Wilmot, R. J., 33, 719, 1265.
Wilson, Sir Robert, 153, 249, 292, 691, 780, 876, 1322.
Wilson, Thomas, 92, 94, 194, 616, 845,1049.
Wodehouse, E. 715.
Wood, Mr. Alderman Matthew, 54, 58, 63, 91, 242, 289, 294.
Wood, Colonel, 756, 770.
Wrottesley, Henry, 757, 801, 869.
Wynn, Charles Watkin Williams. 147, 263, 501, 532, 601, 755, 982, 1010, 1380.
Y
Yorke, Sir Joseph, 158, 1011, 1128, 1179.
END OF VOL. I