THE
New Series,
VOL. VIII.
*
*
*
Of the same Proprietors may be had, in Thirty-six Volumes,
THE
PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY
OF ENGLAND,
FROM THE EARLIEST PERIOD
TO THE YEAR 1803.
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 1803: and
II. A GENERAL INDEX to the Parliamentary Debates from the Year 1803 to the Accession of GEORGE THE FOURTH, in 1820.
The two Volumes will form a complete Parliamentary Dictionary, or ready Book of Reference to every recorded Proceeding of importance that may, at any time, have come before the two Houses of Parliament.
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. VIII.
COMPRISING THE PERIOD
FROM
THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY,
TO
THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL, 1823.
LONDON:
PRINTED BY T. C. HANSARD, PETERBOROUGH-COURT, FLEET-STREET;
FOR BALDWIN, CRADOCK, AND JOY; J. BOOKER; LONGMAN, HURST, REES, AND CO.;J. M. RICHARDSON; BLACK, KINGSBURY, AND CO. J. HATCHARD AND SON; J. RIDGWAY AND SONS; E. JEFFERY AND SON; RODWELL AND MARTIN; R. H. EVANS; BUDD AND CALKIN; J. BOOTH; AND T. C. HANSARD.
1823.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
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. LISTS.
I. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
Page
1823 Feb. 4. Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session
1
1823 Feb. 7. Marriage Act Amendment Bill
87
1823 Feb. 17. Marriage Act Amendment Bill
123
Austrian Loan
124
1823 Feb. 24. Agricultural Distress
234
Marriage Act Amendment Bill
235
Dispute between France and Spain
236
1823 Mar. 21. National Debt Reduction Bill
635
1823 Mar 24. National Debt Reduction Bill
649
King's Property Bill
651
1823 Mar 26. Bankrupt Laws
705
Negotiations relative to Spain
706
1823 Apr. 14. Negotiations relative to Spain
839
1823 Apr. 17. Negotiations relative to Spain
1059
1823 Apr. 24. Lord Ellenborough's Motion respecting the Negotiations relative to Spain
1175
1823 Apr. 25. Negotiations relative to Spain
1289
Appellate Jurisdiction
1291
1823 Apr. 28. Military and Naval Pensions Bill
1298
II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
1823 Feb. 4. Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session
37
1823 Feb. 5. Marriage Act Amendment Bill
80
Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session
82
1823 Feb. 10. The King's Answer to the Address
88
Irish Tithes
89
Sinking Fund
91
The late King's Library
92
1823 Feb. 11. Irish Yeomanry Corps
93
Russian-Dutch Loan
96
Crown Lands and Quit Rents in Ireland
97
Vice-Treasurer of Ireland
98
1823 Feb. 12. Foreign Trade of the Country
98
Irish Courts of Justice—Conduct of Chief Baron O'Grady
105
Committee of Supply—Lieutenant General of the Ordnance—Appointment of Lord George Beresford
110
1823 Feb. 14. Agricultural Distress
117
1823 Feb. 17. Reform of Parliament—London Petition
125
Committee of Supply—Grievances of the People
127
1823 Feb. 18. Bank Balances
136
1823 Feb. 19. Lieutenant General of the Ordnance—Appointment of Lord George Beresford
140
1823 Feb. 20. Lord John Russell's Motion for a Committee to inquire into the Right of Voting
172
1823 Feb. 21. Mr. Thomson's Petition respecting Alterations of the Currency, and for an Equitable Adjustment of Contracts
188
Navy Estimates
192
The Chancellor of the Exchequer's Exposition of the Financial Situation of the Country
194
1823 Feb. 24. Foreign Enlistment Bill—Petition from Southwark
239
Navy Estimates
241
Motion for Papers respecting the Riot at the Dublin Theatre
243
Irish Yeomanry Corps
247
1823 Feb. 25. Mr. Hume's Motion respecting the Revenue and Expenditure of the Colonies
248
1823 Feb. 26. Agricultural Distress—Surrey Petition
254
Mr. Whitmore's Motion respecting the Corn Laws
264
1823 Feb. 27. Ramsgate Harbour
288
Agricultural Distress—Petition from Hereford
288
Lord A. Hamilton's Motion respecting Mr. Bowring's Imprisonment in France
289
1823 Feb. 28. Beer and Ale Bill
301
Mr. Maberly's Motion for the Reduction of Taxation the extent of Seven Millions
302
1823 Mar. 3. East India Sugar—Petition from the Merchants of London National Debt Reduction Acts—Sinking Fund
340
Combination of Workmen
366
1823 Mar. 4. Poor Laws
367
Mr. Hume's Motion respecting the Church Establishment of Ireland
367
Piracy in the West Indies—Dotterel and Carnation cruisers
416
1823 Mar. 5. Society of Jesuits—Petition of W. Parker complaining of their Secret Practices
436
Mr. Abercromby's Motion relative to Orange Societies in Ireland
443
1823 Mar. 6. Petition from Colonel Allen, complaining of the loss of his Commission
490
Irish Tithes Composition and Commutation Bills
494
National Debt Reduction Acts
501
1823 Mar. 7. King's Property Bill
509
Army Estimates
511
1823 Mar. 10. Army Estimates—Officers of the Public Departments—Volunteer Corps in Ireland—Orange Societies
521
Assessed Taxes Reduction Bill
532
1823 Mar. 11. National Debt Reduction Bill
534
1823 Mar. 13. Agricultural Distress
539
Insolvent Debtors Bill
540
Game Laws
541
National Debt Reduction Bill
543
Merchant Vessels Apprenticeship Bill
551
1823 Mar. 14. Mutiny Bill
552
Navy Estimates
575
National Debt Reduction Bill
579
Mr. Creevey's Motion respecting the Four and a Half per Cent. Leeward Island Duty
590
Ordnance Estimates
597
1823 Mar. 18. King's Library
600
Mr. Maberly's Motion for the Repeal of the Assessed Taxes
603
Insolvent Debtors Bill
609
Profane Swearing Bill
615
Mutiny Bill—Foreign Relations
615
Marriage Act Repeal Bill
623
Abolition of Slavery—Petition of the Society of Friends
624
Army Extraordinaries and Miscellaneous Services
630
1823 Mar. 21. Warehousing Bill
642
Beer Duties Bill
646
1823 Mar. 24. Army Extraordinaries—Miscellaneous Estimates
654
Beer Duties Bill
661
Merchant Vessels Apprenticeship Bill
663
Warehousing Bill
666
Motion for Papers relating to the Riot at the Dublin Theatre
667
Military and Naval Pensions Bill
682
Arundel Election—Mr. Parkins's Recognizances
683
1823 Mar. 25. Cape Breton—Petition complaining of Union with Nova Scotia
684
Dispute between France and Spain—Guarantee of the Bourbon Throne
691
Civil List—Foreign Embassies
692
1823 Mar. 25. Case of Colonel Home
695
Newfoundland Laws Bill
702
Forgery Laws Amendment Bill
704
Revenue Department Consolidation Bill
704
1823 Mar. 26. Petition from Mary Ann Carlile for Release from Imprisonment
709
Scotch Burghs—Inverness
735
Monuments to Earl St. Vincent and Lord Duncan
745
1823 Mar. 27. Insolvent Debtors Bill
749
Coal Duties
749
East India Trade
750
Orange Associations
757
Westminster Abbey
765
Abolition of Slavery—Petition from Southwark
766
Foreign Relations—Dispute between France and Spain
771
1823 Apr. 10. Negotiations relative to Spain
801
First Fruits in Ireland
802
Crown Debtors—Contempt of Court
808
1823 Apr. 11. Riot at the Dublin Theatre—Petition of the Grand Jury, complaining of Imputations on their Conduct
812
Military and Naval Pensions Bill
822
Irish Miscellaneous Estimates—Protestant Charter Schools—Female Orphan House—Cork Institution—Royal Dublin Society—Glebe Houses
829
1823 Apr. 14. Negotiations relative to Spain
872
Papers concerning the Negotiations relative to Spain
904
1823 Apr. 15. Mr. Brownlow's Motion respecting the late Ex-Officio Informations in Ireland
964
1823 Apr. 16. Edinburgh Free Thinkers' Zetetic Society
1014.
Lord Althorp's Motion for the Repeal of the Foreign Enlistment Bill
1019
1823 Apr. 17. Roman Catholic Claims—Petitions against the
1070
Roman Catholic Question
1106
1823 Apr. 18. Roman Catholic Question
1123
Military and Naval Pensions Bill
1123
Merchant Vessels Apprenticeship Bill
1125
Miscellaneous Estimates—Westminster Abbey—Caledonian Canal
1126
Complaint against "The Courier" Newspaper
1130
1823 Apr. 21. Warehousing Bill
1131
Irish Tithes Composition Bill
1132
Irish Church Rates Bill
1134
1823 Apr. 22. Additional Papers concerning the Negotiations relative to Spain
1136
Usury Laws
1141
Irish Government
1144
Reform of Parliament—Petition from Lincoln
1147
Sir Francis Burdett's Motion for an Inquiry into the Conduct of the Sheriff of Dublin
1149
1823 Apr. 24. Norfolk Petition for a Reform of Parliament, and an Equitable Adjustment of Contracts
1253
Lord John Russell's Motion for a Reform of Parliament
1260
1823 Apr. 25, Machinery—Petition of Manchester Cotton Weavers
1292
Game Laws—Petition of Richard Dellar for an thereof
1292
State of the Penitentiary at Milbank
1298
1823 Apr. 28. Petition of George White respecting his Dismissal
1300
Mr. Macdonald's Motion respecting the Negotiations Spain
1301
1823 Apr. 29. Mr. Macdonald's Motion respecting Spain—Adjourned Debate
1365
1823 Apr. 30. Mr. Bennet's Motion for abolishing the Punishment of Whipping
1437
Mr. Macdonald's Motion respecting the Negotiations Spain—Adjourned Debate
1442
III. KING'S SPEECHES.
1823 Feb. 4. King's Speech on Opening the Session
1
IV. KING'S MESSAGES.
1823 Mar. 6. King's Message respecting the King's Property
489
V. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.
1823 Mar. 27. Papers relating to the state of Ireland
790
1823 Apr. 14. PAPERS CONCERNING THE NEGOTIATIONS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.
CLASS A. Verona and Paris
904
CLASS B. Paris and Madrid
925
1823 Apr. 22. ADDITIONAL PAPERS CONCERNING THE NEGOTIATIONS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.
Spain
1136
France
1141
Portugal
1112
VI. PETITIONS.
1823 Feb. 21. PETITION of Mr. Thomson respecting Alterations of the Currency, and for an Equitable Adjustment of Contracts
188
1823 Mar. 3. PETITION of the Merchants and Ship-owners trading to the East Indies, respecting the Duties on East India Sugars
337
1823 26. PETITION of Mary Ann Carlile for Release from Imprisonment
715
1823 27. PETITION from Nottingham respecting the Combination of Workmen Bill
751
from Tobago complaining of Distress
754
1823 Apr. 11. PETITION of the Grand Jury of Dublin Complaining of Imputations on Their conduct with regard to the Riots in the Dublin Theatre
812
1823 Apr 16. PETITION of the Edinburgh Free Thinkers' Zetetic Society, for the Liberty of free Discussion on all Subjects
1014
PETITION on Lord Althorp's Motion for the Repeal of the Foreign Enlistment Bill
1058
1823 Apr 24. PETITION from Norfolk, for a Reform of Parliament, and an Equitable Adjustment of Contracts
1253
1823 Apr 25 PETITION of Richard Deller for an Alternation of the Game Laws
1292
VII. LISTS.
1823 Feb. 19. List of the Minority on Mr. Hume's Motion respecting the Appointment of Lord Beresford to the Office of Lieutenant General of the Ordnance
171
1823 Feb. 20. List of the Minority on Lord John Russell's Motion for a Select Committee to inquire into the Right of Voting in the Cities and Boroughs of England and Wales
187
1823 Feb. 26. List of the Minority on Mr. Whitmore's Motion for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Corn Laws
286
1823 Feb. 28. List of the Minority on Mr. Maberley's Motion for a Reduction of Taxation to the extent of Seven Millions
308
1823 Mar. 3. List of the Minority on Mr. Hume's Motion respecting the Sinking Fund
365
1823 Mar. 4. List of the Minority on Mr. Hume's Motion for a Select Committee on the State of the Church Establishment in Ireland
416
1823 Mar. 13. List of the Minority on Mr. Hume's Amendment to the National Debt Reduction Bill
550
1823 Mar. 14. List of the Minority on Mr. Bennet's Amendment to the National Debt Reduction Bill
589
List of the Minority on Mr. Creevey's Motion respecting the Four and a Half per Cent Leeward Island Duty
596
List of the Minority on Mr. Hume's Motion for reducing the Vote in the Ordnance Estimates relating to the Royal Regiment of Artillery
599
1823 Mar. 18. List of the Minority on Mr. Maberly's Motion for the Repeal of the Assessed Taxes
609
1823 Mar. 21. List of the Minority on the Motion for going into a Committee on the Warehousing Bill
646
1823 Mar. 24. List of the Minority on Mr. Hume's Motion for reducing the Vote in the Estimate for the Army Extraordinaries respecting Colonial Agents
656
List of the Minority on Mr. Ricardo's Amendment to the Merchant Vessels Apprenticeship Bill
666
List of the Minority on Colonel Barry's Motion for Papers relating to the Riot at the Dublin Theatre
682
1823 Mar. 25. List of the Minority on Mr. Lennard's Motion respecting the Expense of Foreign Embassies
695
1823 Mar. 26. List of the Minority on Lord Archibald Hamilton's Motion respecting the State of the Borough of Inverness
744
1823 Apr. 24. List of the Minority, in the House of Lords, on Lord Ellenborough's Motion respecting the Negotiations relative to Spain
1253
1823 Apr. 24. List of the Minority on Lord John Russell's, Motion for, a Reform of Parliament
1287
1823 Apr. 30. List of the Minority on Mr. Bennet's Motion for abolishing the Punishment of Whipping
1442
List of the Minority on Mr. Stuart Wortley's Amendment to Mr. Macdonald's Motion respecting the Negotiations relative to Spain
1548
During the Fourth Session of the Seventh Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, appointed to meet at Westminster, the Fourth Day of February 1823, in the Fourth Year of the Reign of His Majesty King GEORGE the Fourth
1823.
1
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, February 4, 1823.
THE KING'S SPEECH ON OPENING THE SESSION.]
This day the Session was opened by Commission. The Commissioners were, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lord Chancellor, and the Earls of Harrow by, Westmorland, and Shaftesbury. The usher of the black rod having been ordered to require the attendance of the House of Commons, he withdrew. The Speaker, accompanied by several members, having appeared at the bar, the Lord Chancellor opened the Session with the following Speech to both Houses:—
"My Lords and Gentlemen;
"We are commanded by his majesty to inform you, that since he has met you in parliament, his majesty's efforts have been unremittingly exerted to preserve the peace of Europe.
"Faithful to the principles which his majesty has promulgated to the world as constituting the rule of his conduct, his majesty declined being party to any proceedings at Verona, which could be deemed an interference in the internal concerns of Spain, on the part of Foreign Powers; and his majesty has since used, and continues to use his most anxious endeavours and good offices to allay the irritation unhappily subsisting between the French and Spanish governments, and to avert, if possible, the calamity of war between France and Spain.
2
"In the east of Europe, his majesty flatters himself that peace will be preserved; and his majesty continues to receive from his Allies, and generally from other powers, assurances of their unaltered disposition to cultivate with his majesty those friendly relations which it is equally his majesty's object on his part to maintain.
"We are further commanded to apprize you, that discussions having been long pending with the court of Madrid respecting depredations committed on the commerce of his majesty's subjects in the West-Indian seas, and other grievances of which his majesty had been under the necessity of complaining, those discussions have terminated in an admission by the Spanish government of the justice of his majesty's complaints, and in an engagement for satisfactory reparation.
"We are commanded to assure you, that his majesty has not been unmindful of the addresses presented to him by the two Houses of Parliament with respect to the foreign slave trade. Propositions for the more effectual suppression of that evil were brought forward by his majesty's plenipotentiary in the conferences at Verona; and there have been added to the treaties upon this subject already concluded between his majesty and the governments of Spain and the Netherlands, articles which will extend the operation of those treaties, and greatly facilitate their execution.
3
"Gentlemen of the House of Commons;
"His majesty has directed the estimates of the current year to be laid before you. They have been framed with every attention to economy; and the total expenditure will be found to be materially below that of last year.
"This diminution of charge, combined with the progressive improvement of the revenue, has produced a surplus exceeding his majesty's expectation; his majesty trusts, therefore, that you will be able, after providing for the services of the year, and without affecting public credit, to make a further considerable reduction in the burthens of his people.
"My Lords and Gentlemen;
"His majesty has commanded us to state to you, that the manifestations of loyalty and attachment to his person and government, which his majesty received in his late visit to Scotland, have made the deepest impression on his heart.
"The provisions which you made in the last session of parliament for the relief of the distresses in considerable districts in Ireland, has been productive of the happiest effects; and his majesty recommends to your consideration, such measures of internal regulation as may be calculated to promote and secure the tranquillity of that country, and to improve the habits and condition of the people.
"Deeply as his majesty regrets the continued depression of the agricultural interest, the satisfaction with which his majesty contemplates the increasing activity which pervades the manufacturing districts, and the flourishing condition of our commerce in most of its principal branches, is greatly enhanced by the confident persuasion, that the progressive prosperity of so many of the interests of the country cannot fail to contribute to the gradual improvement of that great interest which is the most important of them all."
The Commons then withdrew. After which, the Speech being again read by the Lord Chancellor, and also by the clerk at the table,
4
The Earl of Morley
rose. He said, that although the day was past, when their lordships for so many years, upon occasions similar to the present, were in the habit of hearing of the conflicts of fleets and armies, and of the rise and downfall of particular states, yet it might perhaps nevertheless be stated, that upon no occasion did the sovereign of these realms ever address to parliament, a speech more fraught with interesting matter, more pregnant with topics eventually bearing upon the future happiness of mankind, more declaratory of principles and sentiments dear to the hearts of Englishmen, than that which his majesty had that day been graciously pleased to deliver by his commissioners to their lordships and the other House convened at their bar. In proposing for the adoption of their lordships an address to the throne, he should, as a matter of course, feel it to be his duty to expose those general grounds, on which each paragraph in the address might be considered as founded, and as entitled to their favourable attention. The convulsions by which Europe had been agitated, during the last ten years of the past century, and the first fifteen years of the present, and the struggles to which those convulsions gave rise, could not but be fully impressed upon their minds. Whatever difference of' opinion might have existed as to the territorial arrangements and general provisions of the treaties, by which, in 1815, those contests were finally closed, no difference had ever existed as to the fitness of abiding by them; of henceforth, in common with the rest of Europe, looking upon peace as the system to be adhered to; and of abstaining from all proceedings calculated, directly or indirectly, to disturb that state of repose, which exertions beyond all parallel had rendered essential to the general welfare. It could not therefore have been without the deepest regret, and he might add astonishment, that they had this day heard that, his most christian majesty had considered the state of affairs existing in Spain, as demanding the armed interference of France. He would not enter upon the principles upon which the present constitution of Spain was founded, nor upon the events of the 7th of July, nor upon the personal conduct of his catholic majesty since his restoration to his throne (a point which, if it was fit to enter into a detail of Spanish affairs; could not be passed, over), nor upon, the
5
6
"quæ vos fortuna quietos "Solicitat, suadetque experta lacessere bella."
7
8
9
10
11
12
The Earl of Mayo
seconded the Address, in a short speech, which was inaudible below the bar. His lordship expressed his great satisfaction, connected as he was with Ireland, at the manner in which that country had been noticed; and bore testimony to the good which had resulted from all that had been done of late in her behalf.
Earl Stanhope
said:—My lords; I am aware, that on occasions like the present, unanimity is generally thought to be desirable; but there are circumstances in which all such considerations must give way, and in which it is consistent neither with your dignity nor your duty, that your Address should be nothing more than a servile echo of the Speech. If ever those circumstances existed, it is at the present moment, when the distress which afflicts the nation is universal and unexampled; when the necessity of administering relief is most urgent, and when that relief cannot he delayed without danger, nay, without destruction to the country. This is the third session of parliament which has been opened by a speech from the throne, acknowledging and lamenting the existence of distress; and this is also the third session in which you have been invited by the mover of the address, to express in your answer nothing more than general and unavailing regret. The address which has been moved gives no pledge for an inquiry, and no expectation of relief, and it is upon this ground that I intend to propose to your lordships an amendment. If, according to the theory of the noble earl who is at the head of the Treasury, we have been cursed with too much plenty; if we have been afflicted with too much abundance; perhaps the only remedy that could be found under such an unusual, nay, such an unheard of calamity, would be, to adopt the recommendation which has been so kindly and liberally offered by some persons who are connected with administration, and which has, I am sorry to say, been repeated in other quarters, and to discontinue the cultivation of those lands which are of inferior quality. I have no doubt that such advice would be very thankfully received in the county of Norfolk, acid in several others which consist exclusively of land of that description. The inhabitants
13
14
15
16
l.
s.
17
18
19
20
21
22
The Marquis of Lansdown
trusted, that his noble friend would not imagine that he intended any thing like disrespect to him, or that he felt any indifference for the important topics of his speech, when he said, that having, for reasons which he would presently state, brought his mind to the conclusion, after a patient consideration of his majesty's Speech, that it was desirable that their lordships should adopt the Address which had been proposed with unanimity, he meant to abstain from entering into a protracted discussion upon any of the various matters to which his noble friend had very regularly and very naturally adverted, and many of which must, at a future period, become the subjects of grave consideration. It was cer-
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he would not have addressed their lordships upon the present occasion, but for the amendment which had been proposed by the noble earl. He regretted that the noble earl had thought it his duty to propose that amendment, because he considered it calculated to disturb that unanimity which might be of the most essential service. He regretted that circumstance the more, because he could see no necessity for the motion of the noble lord being made upon that particular day. There was nothing contained in the Speech from the throne, or in the Address to his majesty, which could preclude the noble earl from moving for an inquiry as to the state of agriculture or the currency, on the first open day. There was no sentiment in the speech of the noble mover of the Address which militated against any opinion which the noble earl might entertain. He therefore greatly regretted that the noble earl had seized that occasion to move his amendment. Their lordships were always unwilling to adopt any amendment, unless it were provoked by the speech of the person who proposed the address, or by the address itself; because it might, as on the present occasion, lead to a discussion on some of the most intricate questions of political economy, which every body knew could not, in such debates as usually took place on the first day of the session, receive the minute attention which was necessary.
30
31
32
33
34
Lord Ellenberough
declared, that he had heard the greater part of the noble earl's speech with much pleasure and satisfaction. But, acknowledging (as the noble earl had acknowledged), that Spain had given a disclaimer of the mischievous principles that had been imputed to her constitution and government, he was the more astonished that the noble earl could be satisfied with the mere repetition, in the Speech from the throne, of that cold and inadequate protest, which his majesty's ministers had entered in respect of the case of Naples. Yet more astonished he was, that the noble earl could be satisfied with the line of policy that he would have the country adopt, seeing he considered the door of reconciliaton to be still open. Looking to the former conduct of
35
36
37
The Earl of Darnley
declared his inability to concur in the amendment of his noble friend. What he now rose for was, to state that he had intended to call the earliest attention of parliament to the state of Ireland, with a view to mitigate the calamities with which that unhappy country was afflicted. The passage, however, in his majesty's Speech on the subject, induced him to postpone that intention.
Their lordships then divided on earl Stanhope's Amendment: Contents, 3; Not-Contents, 62. After which, the original Address was agreed to,
nem. dis.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, February 4, 1823.
ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH AT
The Speaker having reported the Speech of the Lords Commissioners, and read it to the House,
Mr. Childe
rose to move an Address to his majesty. He said, he could safely declare, that it seldom fell to the lot of an individual to stand in a situation of greater embarrassment than he did at that moment—a situation which strongly called for that patience and favour, which he was taught to believe the House never denied to an individual addressing them for the first time. He rejoiced that the Speech of his majesty contained so frank and so satisfactory a declaration of those principles which admitted the right of self government on the part of other nations. He was sure that that admission would give satisfaction to all descriptions of his majesty's subjects. He was sure that it was, that it had been, and that it ever would be, the wish of this country to maintain the dignity and the honour of the crown; but, after the long hostilities in which it had been engaged, the House, he was persuaded, would feel with him, that it would be the height of impolicy to rush into a war, unless on a question mainly and deeply affecting the interests of the country. A war was to be avoided, on account of the fresh burthens it would necessarily impose, and on account of the injurious
38
39
40
41
42
Mr. Wildman
rose to second the Address, and after alluding to his own embarrassed feelings, observed, that it was to him a matter of great consolation, that there were so many points in his majesty's Speech which afforded him an opportunity of congratulating honourable members upon the happy prospect of improvement held out to the country. He adverted to the course which his majesty's government had wisely thought fit to adopt in the councils at Verona, and felt convinced that every honourable member would agree with him, that it would have been highly derogatory from the dignity of this country to have interfered with the internal affairs of Spain. He sincerely hoped that the anxious endeavours of his majesty to avert the calamity of war between France and Spain would be successful. He entertained sanguine expectations, that in the east of Europe the mediation of his majesty would have a beneficial effect. He then shortly alluded to the steps which had been taken with the British go-
43
44
Sir Joseph Yorke
said, he was afraid he should be accused of great presumption in offering himself thus early to the notice of the House, after the two speeches which they had just heard; but though not called upon, he should still offer a few words, not to move or second, but to third the Address. He would not, however, detain the House by going over the general topics to which it referred. It was only upon that part of it which related to the foreign policy of the country, that he would raise his feeble voice. It was with real satisfaction that he found ministers following the good old feelings of the country, and not advocating an interference in the internal concerns of another state. He was glad to find that the instructions given to our ambassador at Verona were to be silent on the occasion when the other states raised their voices in support of an interference with Spain. By silence, he meant not acquiescence in, but opposition to, that interference. He thought this country was bound to show to France and the world, the absurdity,
45
Mr. Brougham
*
*
46
47
48
49
50
51
Te Deum
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
Sir Francis Burdett
rose, but the cheering which followed Mr. Brougham's speech, rendered the commencement of
65
Mr. Secretary Peel
expressed his satisfaction, that there was such a desire in the House to concur with the sentiments contained in the Speech from the throne, and also with the sentiments which it was proposed to embody in the Address in answer thereto. After complimenting the hon. mover and seconder for the ability they had displayed, he proceeded to state,
66
67
if
if
68
69
70
Sir James Mackintosh
said, it was not his intention at all adversely to meet and discuss the speech just delivered, as he applauded many of the just principles it contained, and commended the reserve which ministerial prudence dictated, as to the application of future measures adapted to particular circumstances. As
71
72
73
74
75
sine qua non,
76
77
Mr. Denman
said, that if peace come be maintained, consistently with the honour and security of the country, in God's name let it be preserved; but if
78
79
80
The Address was then agreed to,
nem. con.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.]
Wednesday, February 5, 1823.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.]—
Dr. Phillimore
said, he could assure the House, that it was with considerable regret he felt himself again obliged to trouble it on the subject of the Marriage act; but the House was so circumstanced with respect to it, that he felt it a duty to submit some alterations therein. It would be in the recollection of hon. members, that after several years, during which bills on this subject were sent up to, and rejected by the other house of parliament, a bill was last year sent up, which, in the opinion of most members, was so well calculated to answer its object, that it did not call for that species of comment to which it had been submitted in another place. He spoke with the less delicacy on this subject; for though he was one of those who were active in promoting the measure, the principal parts of it were not his, but were drawn up by persons the best calculated for such a duty. In that state the bill passed the House of Commons, and was sent up to the other House. It pleased that House, however, to leave only two clauses of the original measure; along with which they sent back a code of amendments clogged with difficulties almost insuperable, making the whole a piece of legislation extremely complicated and inconvenient. When the bill returned, it was late in the session; and the House was in this difficulty—either to reject the measure altogether, and thereby delay the benefit to be expected from those clauses which could be operative in removing the evil, or to allow the whole to pass, and wait till the present session for the repeal of the objectionable clauses. He being the hum-
81
Leave was accordingly given.
82
ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH AT
Mr. Childe
having brought up the report of the Address in answer to the King's Speech,
Sir R. Wilson
said, it was not his intention to disturb the unanimity which prevailed in the House on the present aspect of foreign affairs; but he could not suffer that opportunity to pass without offering a few words. After the impression which the powerful address of his hon. and learned friend (Mr. Brougham) had produced on the House last night, it was far from his intention to trespass on their time for more than a few moments; but, a word had fallen from a right hon. gentleman last night which be thought called for some remark. He had understood the right hon. gentleman to mention the word "neutrality." Now, he would anxiously wish to guard the House against being too confident that that would not he the course adopted by this country. A more disastrous course could not be pursued, as far as Spain was concerned; nor one less honourable to the character of this country. If once that part were decided upon, what was there to prevent France from passing the Pyrenees, and attempting to carry into effect her wicked, and he would say, premeditated project? But if she found the whole coast from Bayonne to Dunkirk exposed to the operations of our fleets, she would be more cautious how she ventured to advance with a chance of our being actively employed against her. He had no doubt, if the right hon. gentleman had given a pledge of neutrality on the part of this country, that he had done so in the expectation that it could be rendered valid. That, however, would be found to be a work of no little difficulty. We should recollect, that the approaching contest between France and. Spain would not be for a boundary line: it was an attempt on the part of the former to put down the constitution—the free choice of the Spanish nation—that constitution which the allied sovereigns at Lay bath had declared they would put down wherever they met it within their reach. But it was not Spain alone that we had to look to. Portugal, too, must be expected to be brought into the contest. She also had a constitution which the emperor Alexander would not recognize; and she would no doubt be anxious to defend it. But supposing Portugal to be so unwise, and he would even say, so base, as to desert Spain in her
83
84
85
Colonel Davies
expressed his concurrence in the sentiments of independence which had been so generally expressed by the House in the discussion of the former evening. There was one point, however, in which he differed from the gallant officer who had addressed them with so much spirit at an early period of the evening. That gallant officer had ex pressed a hope, that we should preserve
86
Mr. Hutchinson
, though he agreed with every syllable in the Address, contended, that stronger language ought to have been put into the king's mouth, in the present critical situation of affairs. Such language would have struck terror into the congregated despots of the continent, and would have shown the sons of freedom in Spain, that the population of this country, from the prince down to the peasant, was determined to thwart the designs of their oppressors. The whole continent was at present looking up to the conduct of this country; and such a declaration from so high a quarter, would have excited it to a successful opposition against the tyrants who were oppressing it. He hoped ministers would be able to show, that not only had this country not joined at Verona in the unprincipled aggression upon Spain, but that it had opposed itself to it with all its influence. He cordially agreed in every sentiment which the hon. and learned member for Winchelsea had last night expressed, respecting the iniquitous notes of the three great continental powers. He rejoiced to hear the king advising his parliament to take into consideration the state of Ireland, and An improvement in the habits and condition of the people of Ireland could not, however, be effected by words alone,
87
The Address was then agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, February 7, 1823.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.—]
Lord Ellenborough
said, that he was anxious to take the first opportunity which offered itself, to amend any defects that might have been found to exist in the Marriage act which was passed last session. During the discussions on the bill last year, it had been frequently insinuated, that the supporters of the measure were only anxious to carry that part of it which was retrospective in its operation. He had always denied the truth of that statement; because he knew that the supporters of the bill were anxious to make the prospective part of it as perfect as possible. He could assure the House, that it was to him a subject of deep regret, that any inconveniences should have been found to arise from the operation of that part of the act. At the time the question was agitated, many of the warmest supporters of the bill imagined that inconveniences might result from it; but, knowing that the House would have an opportunity of remedying those inconveniences after an experience of six mouths, they thought it advisable that the measure should pass. It could not be denied that some inconveniences had arisen from the act of last session; but they had been much exaggerated, and he could not help thinking that there was something not perfectly disinterested at the bottom of the clamour which had been raised upon the subject. The manner in which it would be advisable to amend the act of last session had been a subject of serious consideration with himself and other noble lords who felt an interest in the question. The first mode suggested was to recite in a new bill, all the parts of the present act which it was deemed expedient to repeal; but it was considered that this would render the new act a mass of confusion. It was therefore determined to adopt a different course of proceeding, and the bill which he intended
88
Lord Redesdale
said, that the inconvenience of administering the oaths at the solemnization of the marriage, and of making that, as it were, a part of the marriage ceremony, would be felt in populous parishes, where several marriages took place on the same day. It would be better to administer the oaths previously to the publication of the bans; because the canons required that clergymen should be satisfied that the parties about to be married were what they represented themselves to be.
The Lord Chancellor
said, he had strongly opposed the act passed last session. It had excited great clamour, perhaps more than it ought; but it was evident that such a measure could not fail to call forth a strong expression of discontent. He was desirous to bestow all the attention in his power upon the bill about to be introduced; and all he asked for was, that their lordships might be allowed sufficient time deliberately to consider every part of it.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, February 10, 1823.
THE KING'S ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.]—
The Speaker
reported the King's Answer to the Address as follows;—
89
IRISH TITHES.]—
Sir H. Parnell
presented a petition from the grand jury of Queen's County, praying for a commutation of tithes. He said, he knew of no measure more likely to put an end to the unfortunate disturbances which had so long distracted his ill-fated country, than that which the petitioners prayed fur. He had been informed that the noble marquis at the head of the Irish government, intended to propose to parliament some specific plan for effecting an alteration in the tithe system of Ireland. If that plan should fortunately prove successful, he would confer one of the greatest benefits upon Ireland. As the manner in which tithe was at present exacted was productive of equal inconvenience both to the payer and to the receiver, he trusted that the clergy of Ireland would not oppose the attempt which the noble marquis was now making to reform the system. He likewise hoped that his hon. friend (Mr. Hume) would postpone the motion of which he had given notice, until that which was to be submitted from the Irish government had been introduced to the House.
Colonel Trench
cordially concurred in the prayer of the petitioners. If that prayer was granted, much would be done towards securing the tranquillity of Ireland. The present system of church government in that country was as injurious to the protestant, as it was hostile and oppressive to the catholic part of the community.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
fully concurred in every syllable which had been said on this subject. Though he conceived the measure which had been passed last session to be completely inefficient and impracticable, he was of opinion, that the discussions which it had occasioned had been of the greatest service. He trusted that the measure which government had in contemplation, would meet with that
90
Mr. Goulburn
said, that the government of Ireland had, from the first moment of its arrival in that country, been sedulously endeavouring to discover, some mode of removing the evils which arose from the present system of collecting tithes. In the last session, he had brought forward a measure for that purpose; and though it might not have been as efficient as he could have wished, still he could not join in condemning it as the useless and impracticable measure which his hon. friend had described it to be. The subject had since that time been again taken into the consideration of the Irish government; and he trusted that when he should submit it to the notice of the House, it would be found worthy of its support and approbation.
Mr. Spring Rice
asserted, that a more inefficient measure than that of last session had never been passed. Not one individual throughout Ireland had attempted to take advantage of it. As the declarations of the right hon. secretary were now of the same vague and unsatisfactory nature that they were last session, he trusted that his hon. friend would on no consideration postpone the motion of which he had given notice.
Mr. Secretary Peel
thought that the hon. gentleman had no just reason to complain of the vague declarations made by his right hon. friend. The proposed measure would be brought forward at a period sufficiently early to enable the hon. member for Aberdeen to obtain the fullest discussion of his motion upon the same subject. It was desirable that that motion should be postponed, until the plan of the Irish government had been introduced.
Mr. Hume
saw no reason why he should give way upon this subject, especially after the long delays on the part of ministers. They, or their friends, had been twenty-five years in office, during which they had done nothing to remedy the admitted evil. It was this delay of remedies that had rendered it necessary to keep down the people of Ireland by military establishments. It was now understood that the clergy of Ireland, after a long and strong opposition, had consented to commute their tithes, for, an acreable assessment. He had no objection to mention the general nature of his
91
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
Ordered to lie on the table.
SINKING FUND.]—
Mr. Hume
, in rising to move that a series of financial papers which had been laid on the table of the House, should be printed, was anxious to preface his motion with a few observations. The title of one of these papers was, "An Account of all Sums paid over to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, for the year ending the 5th Jan. 1823;" and from that document it appeared, that 15,853,000
l.
Mr. Grenfell
concurred with his hon. friend as to the folly of that system which induced government to lay before the House and the country this most idle and unsatisfactory account. He thought, however, that his hon. friend ought, in justice to the late chancellor of the exchequer, to have stated, that that right hon. gentleman had pledged himself, that the whole of that system which his hon. friend reprobated would be re-modelled; and that in future, the account of the sinking-fund should consist only of the surplus of income over expenditure.
92
Mr. Lushington
said, that one of the earliest objects of government would be to bring the subject of the sinking fund under the consideration of the House, for the purpose of simplifying the system, and rendering it more intelligible.
The Lord Mayor
(Mr. Alderman Heygate) deprecated any interference with the sinking fund system, from which the country had derived so much benefit. The proposition to enable the commissioners of the sinking fund to lend the money paid over to them for the service of the year, originated with one of the greatest ministers this country ever saw. It had been approved of by Mr. Fox, and was supported by Mr. Sheridan, and other eminent men, who usually sat on the opposition side of the House. It was a provision which arose from an act of the legislature at the time to which he had alluded; and he confessed he heard with great regret, that it was intended to depart from that system of financial arrangement which had rendered the credit of this country superior to that of any other state in the world. He would contend, that the sinking fund, by the way in which it had been managed, had enabled Great Britain to cope with the most powerful enemy that had ever been opposed to her. The system had been adopted by America, France, Russia, and Prussia; in short, it had been acted on wherever there was any thing like a representative government. He trusted, however anxious gentlemen might be to reduce the taxes, that still there was a spirit in that House which would, he was going to say, compel government to keep faith with the public creditor.
Mr. Lushington
said, that the intention was merely to bring in a bill to simplify the system, and thereby to render it more intelligible.
THE LATE KING'S LIBRARY.]—
Lord John Russell
begged to know whether it was true, that his majesty meant to make a gift of the late king's library to the public. If such were the case, it was a proceeding well calculated to strengthen the attachment of the people to the House of Brunswick; and he wished that the high utility of the present might be preserved, by its being placed in such a situation as should make it generally accessible. It was a general complaint, that the metropolis had no sufficient public library; for that of the British Museum
93
Mr. Peel
said, that the report was well-founded. No particular arrangement as to the disposal of the gift had yet been made; but he doubted not that the object aimed at by the noble lord would be duly attended to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, February 11, 1823.
IRISH YEOMANRY CORPS.]—
Mr. Goulburn
asked leave to bring in a bill to continue and amend the acts for training the Irish Yeomanry. As these acts would expire in a few weeks, he thought it requisite to move for their renewal at as early a period as possible.
Mr. Hume
said, that before he gave his consent to the introduction of this bill, he must ask the right hon. secretary whether the Irish Police act of the last session had not, in a great degree, rendered it unnecessary? The acts which it was now intended to renew, were productive of an annual expense of 66,000
l.
94
l.
1.
l.
Mr. Goulburn
said, he was not prepared to explain at that moment whether Mr. Collis was as strong or as infirm as the hon. member; but if it was his intention to bring that grant under the notice of the House, he should be prepared at a fit opportunity to give the necessary explanation regarding it. At present, he should confine himself to the mere explanation of one circumstance, namely, how so many brigade majors were found on the list. At the close of the war, the number which before had been very great, was reduced to the state in which it existed at present; and the supernumeraries were placed on the half-pay. Since that time, whenever any vacancy had occurred in the brigade-majors which it was determined to keep up, it had been filled up out of those supernumeraries; and therefore there was no ground for the insinuation of-the hon. gentleman.
Mr. Abercromby
said, that the right
95
Mr. Goulburn
said, he could assure honourable members, that he never entertained the slightest intention of hurrying this bill through the house. He had placed it thus early upon the table, in order that it might receive the fullest discussion. He could assure the hon. member for Calne, that the time would soon come when the circumstances to which he had alluded would be brought under the consideration of parliament.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
condemned the attack made upon the yeomanry corps of Ireland, as most unfair and illiberal. The corps which he had the honour to command, instead of being composed entirely of Orangemen, had not a single Orangeman in it. Indeed, to the best of his belief, in the yeomanry corps in the south of Ireland, nine out of every ten men were Catholics. In the county of Clare there was one corps in which there were only ten Protestants, and another in which there was not even one; and yet to that corps the government had been chiefly indebted, on a late occasion, for the quiet of the county. Unless the hon. member intended to assert that the yeomanry corps were altogether useless, he ought not to oppose the present bill, of which the sole object was to place them under military control. The superannuations appeared to him to be made upon the best principle, and certainly not from corrupt and profligate views. The hon. member had alluded to the superannuation of a major Collis. He could not tell whether there were two brigade majors of that name; but if the major Collis alluded to was the same major Collis who had been the inspector
96
Mr. Spring Rice
reminded the last speaker, that his remarks on the manner in which some yeomanry corps were constituted only applied to those in the south of Ireland. The yeomanry force of Ireland amounted, however, to 30,000 men, and of these 20,000 were raised from the single province of Ulster. Now, he would contend, that all the objections to the yeomanry corps, arising from the Orange infusion by which they were tainted, applied in full force to the yeomanry of the province of Ulster. If some measure was not proposed to put down the processions of the Orange societies, which were known to be illegal, he should endeavour to add a clause to the present bill, to prevent the yeomanry from joining in them; because, alarming as they were at all times, they became doubly dangerous when men with arms in their hands formed a part of them.
Mr. Hume
said, that in the paper to which he had before alluded, he found this entry—"Edward Collis, 136
l.
Mr. Peel
denied that the individual in question, or indeed any other, had been allowed to retire, for the purpose of giving facility to the appointment of another person in his stead.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
RUSSIAN-DUTCH LOAN.]—
Mr. Hume
, in moving for various documents relating to the Russian-Dutch loan, observed, that few were aware that, by a convention dated in May 1815, Great Britain agreed to pay to the king of the Netherlands a loan of three millions advanced to Russia. Perhaps, therefore, at that very moment, the emperor Alexander was preparing to make war upon Spain, with the funds of this country. The consideration for this payment was the possession of the Cape of Good Hope and Demerara, which had since cost Great Britain about half the original purchase-money, and they must always remain a useless burden. He wished to know what amount of prin-
97
CROWN LANDS AND QUIT RENTS IN IRELAND.]—
Mr. Hume
moved that a Copy of the Report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire respecting the Crown Lands and Quit Rents of Ireland, be laid before the House. As he intended to submit a motion to the House on the subject, he thought that a copy of the commissioners' report should be laid before it. He intended to subunit that the whole of these crown lands and quit rents should be sold, and the proceeds appropriated to the payment of the national debt. If put up to sale, he was persuaded they would fetch two millions. The hon. member complained, that the triennial report relative to woods and forests, which ought to have been laid on the table last year, had been kept back. It was intended, he said, that the whole of the crown lands in Great Britain should be available for the public service; but at present they rather increased the burdens of the country, being wholly wasted in pensions. He then moved for a Copy of the said Report; and an Account of the Sums transferred to the Three per Cents, on account of the crown lands, and also of the Forfeited Estates, in Ireland.
Mr. Goulburn
said, that an act had been passed last session, to do the very thing with regard to the crown lands of Ireland, which the hon. member seemed now only to find out would be a convenient thing. As for the measure intended to be founded on these papers, it had already been carried into execution.
Mr. Hume
said, he was aware of the act alluded to, directing the lands to be sold. What he complained of was, not that the House did not make laws enough, but that they were riot executed.
The motion was agreed to.
98
VICE-TREASURER OF IRELAND.]—
Mr. Hume
referred to the manner in which the two exchequers of Great. Britain and Ireland had been consolidated and united some years ago. He saw no reason why the same plan should not be pursued with regard to all the other departments, as was now the case with Scotland. A paper laid upon the table last year showed the enormous salaries of an immense number of persons dependent upon the lord lieutenant of Ireland, nearly the whole of which expense might be saved, if the system he recommended were adopted. He should hereafter bring forward a proposition to remove the lord lieutenancy, and all offices connected with it, to London. He was anxious, particularly, to call the attention of the House to the office of vice-treasurer of Ireland, a useless expense of between 7,000
l.
l.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, February 12, 1823.
FOREIGN TRADE OF THE COUNTRY.
—Mr. Wallace
rose, in pursuance of notice, to move for the revival of the committee of last session, to consider of the best means of maintaining and improving the Foreign Trade of the country. He made this motion not merely upon the general ground, that the commerce of the country was likely to receive important advantages from the labours of such a committee, but also upon a special reason, arising out of the circumstances under which the committee had separated at the close of last session. He was sure that the House would recollect, that when the dock system was first established in this country, certain exclusive privileges were granted to those who expended their
99
100
l.;
l.
101
102
103
104
Mr. Baring
rose to acknowledge the obligations which the trade of the country owed to the right hon. gentleamn. The merits of the right hon. gentleman were fully appreciated by the merchants of London. There was but one opinion amongst them, and that was, that since the first establishment of the Board of Trade, all the exertions of all its former presidents were not, when united, equal to those which had been made by the right hon. gentleman alone, during the time he had tilled that office with so much honour to himself and so much advantage to the community at large.
Mr. Ricardo
rose for the purpose of paying his tribute of respect to the merits of the right hon. gentleman, who had so lately filled the office of vice-president of the Board of Trade. He would say this; that, much as the right hon. gentleman's plans had benefitted the commerce of the country, they would have benefitted it still more, had all of them been fully carried into effect. They had met, however, with too many obstacles from interests that were hostile to his improvements; and, though he regretted the circumstance much, he must still observe, that those interests ought to be tenderly dealt with. He thought it would be wiser to make a compensation to any parties who might be injured by the alteration, than to persist in a system which was proved to be detrimental to the commercial interests of the nation at large. He had heard with the greatest pleasure, the very liberal speech which the right hon. gentleman had made that evening; nor was it with less satisfaction that he had heard his flattering account of the export trade of the country. It had been said, that the exports were greater now than they had been during the most flourishing year of the war. It ought likewise to be stated, that during the war our great foreign exports went to meet our great foreign expenditure; whereas at present we received valuable returns for every thing we exported. In looking at the general state of the country, it was satisfactory to find that, amid the gloom and distress in which the agricultural interests were involved, its foreign commerce was in a flourishing condition. He was sure
105
Mr. Hume
rose to express his deep regret that the country was likely to lose the services of the right hon. gentleman, who, for the last two or three years, had devoted his attention so beneficially to the public. If ministers had had the interest of the nation as much at heart, as the making a provision for their friends, they would have contrived, in some way, to have secured the assistance of the vice president of the Board of Trade. It had most fortunately of late become the general opinion, that the interest of the state was involved in the interests of individuals, and the labours of the right hon. gentleman had been applied to carry this principle into effect. It was, therefore, deeply to be lamented, that he was compelted by circumstances to retire from his situation.
Mr. Secretary Canning
cordially agreed in what had just fallen from the hon. member for Aberdeen. He regretted, as much as any man, that any circumstances should have occurred to induce his right hon. friend to withdraw his aid from his majesty's government. What those circumstances were was not perhaps a fit subject for discussion: he could only say, that there was no member of the government who did not join with blot in appreciating most highly the talents of the coadjutor they were about to lose. Though feelings of delicacy might induce his right hon. friend to relinquish the situation he now held, no effort would be left untried, on the part of the king's government, to replace him in an office equal to his high abilities and eminent services.
The committee was then re-appointed.
COURTS OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND—CHIEF BARON O'GRADY.]—
Mr. Spring Rice
requested the attention of the House while he brought before it a subject of the greatest importance. He alluded to the administration of justice in Ireland, and particularly the charges contained in the 9th and 11th reports of the commissioners of inquiry against chief baron O'Grady. He did not wish to go into the merits of this great question at the present moment. He would now only state specifically what had been done on this sub
106
107
l.
108
Mr. Goulburn
was confident that the hon. member must anticipate the reply he should give to the inquiry contained in what had been just stated, and he trusted that the House would concur in the propriety of the course which government thought itself called upon to pursue. True it was, that the marquis of Londonderry occasioned a further inquiry into a part of the case; but it did not follow, that it was the duty of ministers to proceed with the other parts of it. The committee had been appointed to obtain further information for the general satisfaction of the House; and it seemed to him (Mr. G.), that for government to take up the charge under the particular and especial circumstances, would be a great injustice to the individual inculpated,
109
Mr. Abercromby
contended, that the marquis of Londonderry, by the proceeding he had recommended, and by the committee he had appointed, had, in point of fact, adopted this accusation. There was no duty more important than for a government to watch over the due administration of justice. He also objected to this being made a party question; but the way to render it so, was to leave it in the hands of an individual member, and to direct against him all the influence of ministers. This charge had for several years been depending against the chief baron, during which time he had gone the circuit, and had tried criminals, when perhaps he himself ought to have been put upon his trial. If government did not proceed, they would be guilty of an abandonment of their duty. If the hon. member for Limerick would take his advice, Le would recommend him to drop the subject, in order to see whether ministers would venture to remain passive spectators.
Mr. Secretary Peel
observed, that the real question was, whether government ought to take the case out of the hands of the hon. member for Limerick, who had commenced the proceeding in 1821. Was there any reason why he should relieve himself, and throw the burthen upon the shoulders of others? Ministers must, of course, be at all times anxious to facilitate these proceedings, and had done their utmost to carry the reforms recommended by the commissioners into effect. They were by no means desirous of shrink-
110
Mr. Grant
by no means agreed, that in moving for a committee, the marquis of Londonderry had pledged government to prosecute the complaint. He thought, however, that the best course which could be taken at present, would be to refer the whole matter to a committee anew.
Mr. S. Rice
said, he never meant to assert that the marquis of Londonderry had given any distinct pledge on the part of government; yet certainly the moving a committee of his own nomination, was a most extraordinary way of leaving the matter in the management of himself (Mr. Rice). Though he had been the proposer of this inquiry, he had never discussed it in any other way than by calling on government to do its duty. Not that he shrunk from any responsibility; but as this was a great public inquiry, and as it had now received the sanction of a committee, and was borne out by facts and documents, he did think that he might call upon the government for a more marked and earnest declaration of opinion than they had as vet given. He protested against the supposition, that this was to be considered as the charge of any individual member. It was the charge of the parliamentary commissioners, after a judicial inquiry; it was the charge of a select committee above stairs, and he was only the instrument, on the present occasion, of bringing the case under the notice of the House.
The motion was agreed to.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY—LIEUTENANT-GENERAL OF THE ORDNANCE.]—
On the order of the day for going into a Committee of Supply,
Mr. Hume
said, he had been pleased, and indeed every man in the House must have been pleased, with the promises held out in the Speech from the throne, as to economy and lightening the burthens of the people. But, however unpleasant it was to doubt the words of the throne, when those words were formally addressed
111
l.,
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
112
l.
l.
l.
l.
113
Mr. Canning
said, he would submit to the House, and to the hon. gentleman himself, whether the question was in such a shape at that moment as would justify his pressing it. He did not mean to say that it was not competent to the hon. gentleman to pursue the course he was now adopting; but it surely could not be advisable to resort to the extreme remedy of stopping the supplies, until he obtained an answer to his question, without having given previous notice of his intention to submit it to the consideration of the House. To say that it was unusual, he knew was only to urge an argument which the hon. gentleman was at liberty to reject or to admit. But the House would say, whether it would depart on this occasion from its established usage, and in the present stage of the business reprobate an appointment, which the hon. gentleman admitted was without the
gravamen
114
115
Mr. Brougham
felt himself obliged to oppose his hon. friend's motion. He did so with regret; but the question was one which it behoved the House to deliberate upon seriously; and as this could not be done without the assistance of the members of that department to whom it belonged to defend the appointment, he wished it should be postponed to a period when their presence could be ensured. It was far too important to be taken up by the House thus incidentally; and if any thing could tend to confirm him in the opinion, that it should be postponed to a more favourable opportunity, it was the line of defence adopted by the right hon. secretary. He had given very satisfactory reasons why lord Beresford had been chosen; but he had not given the shadow of a reason why the offer of the appointment had been made to any one. The question did not, and could not, apply personally to lord Beresford. No man could be more ready than he was to admit the services of that meritorious officer. Nothing could be more natural than that the duke of Wellington should offer this appointment to him, as well as to two others of his gallant companions in arms; but still the information was wanting, why the office was in existence to be offered to the one or the other. When the vacancy occasioned by the death of general Oakes offered an opportunity of putting an end to it, there could be no doubt that the country had a right to be informed, why that opportunity was not immediately seized upon. There was another objection, besides that of stopping the supplies, which occurred to him, against the further discussion of this subject at the present moment. It was not consistent with parliamentary usage. When information was required, it was obtained, either by an order that it should be laid before the House, when it was within the power of the House, or by an address to the throne; but it had never been the practice to ask for information, without stating by whom it ought to be granted. He should be glad if his hon. friend would postpone his motion for the present, giving, at the same time, notice of his intention to bring it before the House at an early opportunity.
Mr. Hume
said, that the House was in no way taken by surprise. Any gen-
116
Sir R. Fergusson
expressed his esteem for lord Beresford's character, and his sense of his public services; but he felt that, on this occasion, private friendship ought to give way. He would therefore support the motion.
Mr. G. Bennet
supported the motion. He thought his hon. friend, was perfectly right in availing himself of every constitutional opportunity of pursuing his useful career. He wished the question to be fairly put, that it might be seen whether the House would support it or not.
Mr. Hutchinson,
in rising to support the motion, would neither be understood to undervalue the merit of lord Beresford, nor to withhold from the government those supplies, which, at the present momentous crisis, were necessary for the dignity of the country. The motion was merely one for information; and he would not have it go abroad, that, at such a juncture, the House had neglected to support an inquiry, the object of which was to lessen the public burdens.
Mr. Abercromby
had always been taught to consider, that it was one of their most valuable privileges to be able to stop the supplies. He therefore thought they ought not to call it into action, but upon the most important occasions. His hon. friend's motion stood upon strong grounds. He would suggest to him the propriety of disconnecting it from the question of supply, and of letting it stand upon its intrinsic merits.
Sir F. Burdett
said:—I fully agree with what has fallen from my hon. friend who has just sat down. I think it quite clear that no beneficial results can arise, from a perseverance in the proposed amendment. I am prepared to support every proposition which has for its object an expedient reduction of the public expenditure; and I give to the hon. member for Aberdeen all the merit to which his resolute and unceasing attention to the
117
Mr. Hume
consented to withdraw his amendment. After which, the House went into the committee.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, February 14, 1823.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.]—
The report of the Committee of Supply being brought up,
Sir T. Lethbridge
said, that not finding any intimation from government of its intention to bring forward measures for the relief of the agricultural interest, he wished to put one or two questions to the ministers of the crown. He was much gratified to find the last paragraph in the royal Speech, characterizing the lauded interest as the most important interest of the country; but he regretted that that sentiment was not followed up by a pledge, that government would meet the great question of agricultural depression in that manly way which its consequence demanded. He dreaded lest the landowners of England were to be left during another session in their present depressed—he had almost said degraded—situation. It was impossible for government not to be aware of their distress. The five hun-
118
Mr. Secretary Canning
said:—It is quite impossible to find fault with the hon. baronet, and nobody can be less disposed to do so than myself, for having availed himself of the opportunity of bringing up the present report to express his regret and disappointment at not seeing introduced into his majesty's Speech from the throne any specific promise of relief for the agricultural interest. On the other hand, the hon. baronet does great injustice to his majesty's ministers, if he supposes that either on this, or on any former occasion, they have been deficient in a desire to give relief, if relief be practicable, by any of those direct measures which the hon. baronet deems to be beneficial; still less, if he supposes that they do not look with the most sincere sympathy to distresses, which have undoubtedly prevailed to a degree which every man who is interested for the welfare of the country must acknowledge and deplore. If it had been in the power of his majesty's ministers to afford relief, they would not have waited for the call of the hon. baronet. I regret, as much as the hon. baronet, that it was not possible to add to the concluding paragraph of the king's Speech a declaration of his majesty's ministers' intention to propose some specific measure of relief; but I am sure
119
120
Mr. Curwen
said, he deeply lamented, that his majesty's ministers had come at last to this conclusion, that no relief but that of time could be afforded to the distresses of the agricultural interest. He did not hesitate to say, that the country was placed in a more perilous situation than any in which it had yet stood, by the declaration of the right hon. secretary; nor did he see any prospect of amelioration, except from a remission of the direct taxation, which immediately affected the agricultural interest. It was not sufficient to relieve the community in general, ministers must come directly to the point of relieving the burthens of the agricultural interest. It was far from his wish to break faith with the public credi-
121
Mr. Robertson
was anxious, as he felt deeply interested in this question, to offer a few remarks for the consideration of the House. He wished to bring the question distinctly before them, and to state what were his views and intentions with respect to it. They had heard, from time to time, different reasons assigned for the prevailing distress. He, however, believed, that the system of credit which had been adopted in this country for many years, was one great cause of the evils the people were now labouring under. As this suggestion was new, he threw it out for the consideration of members, previously to the period when he might bring it more formally under their consideration. During the French and Spanish war, from 1740 to 1749, the government borrowed money at the rate of 3 and 4 per cent. Now, he would contend, that if their credit was as good at present as it was then, they should not
122
l.
123
l.
l.
l.
l.
The report was then brought up, and agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, February 17, 1823.
MARRIAGE ACT.]—
Several petitions were presented, complaining of the clause in the new Marriage act, which took away from peculiars the privilege of granting marriage licences.
Lord Ellenborough
observed, that with regard to this point, no information had been given to the House either by learned lords, or by the right rev. bench, and thus the House had been induced to agree to a clause in the act of last session, taking away from peculiars the right of granting marriage licences without being aware of the extent of the inconvenience thus created, or the vested rights with which they had thus interfered.
Lord Redesdale
said, he took the blame of the clause to himself. The fact was, that he was not aware of the number of peculiars having the right of granting licences, nor was it, he believed, at all known in the House.
Lord Stowell
observed, that though immediately connected with the administration of justice in the ecclesiastical courts, he was not at all aware of the number of peculiars having the right of granting licences, nor was it known to the right rev. bench, it not coming at all under their cognizance.
Lord Ellenborough
hoped there would be no objection to restoring the rights of these peculiars, founded as they were upon immemorial usage.
124
Lord Stowell
said, he had no objection to a clause of that nature.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he would not pledge himself upon this question, without knowing more of the nature of these peculiars.
Lord Redesdale
was of opinion, that none of the rights of these peculiars could be of older date than the Reformation, and it was doubtful whether some of them would bear the test of inquiry, or whether the exercise of them had not been assumed in consequence of grants of property to ecclesiastical corporations or individuals.
The Lord Chancellor
was apprehensive, that in some of those jurisdictions called peculiars, licences had been granted, which were not legal, before the parties were aware of the operation of the act of last session; and though he had felt it a painful duty to oppose the retrospective clauses in the act of last session, he should be perfectly ready to agree to a retrospective clause, for the purpose of giving a legal effect to the licences so illegally granted, in order to prevent the unhappy consequences that might otherwise arise, with regard to the marriages solemnized by virtue of such licences.
Lord Stowell,
with the view of framing a measure that should be generally and clearly understood, moved the appointment of a committee, to consider the present state of the law regarding marriages, and whether any and what amendment ought to be made therein.
The motion was agreed to, and a committee appointed.
AUSTRIAN LOAN.]—
Several petitions were presented, complaining of Agricultural Distress.
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, he thought it a fit opportunity, when petitions were presented, complaining of distress which unfortunately was but too well known to exist, to ask a question of the noble earl opposite, regarding a large sum of money which had, for a considerable period, been due to this country. There was but too much reason to complain of the sums which had been lavishly wasted during the progress of the war, and in particular of one large advance to a continental power, which ought to have been long since repaid. He alluded to what had been called the Austrian Loan. It had been understood last session, that a negociation was to take place respecting
125
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that the Austrian loan being merely a transaction between the government of this country and that of Austria, could not become a subject of discussion, either at the congress of Vienna or of Verona. It was true, however, that a noble friend of his had intimated in the last session, that a negociation was in progress with the court of Vienna upon this subject; and he had no hesitation in saying, that the principle of an arrangement for the repayment of the loan had been agreed to by the Austrian government. He trusted he should soon be enabled to announce, that the arrangement had been concluded.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, February 17, 1823.
REFORM OF PARLIAMENT—LONDON PETITION.]—
The Sheriffs of London presented at the bar the petition of the corporation for a Reform of Parliament.
Mr. Alderman Wood
said, that the petition was well deserving of attention. He was sorry not to see any of his majesty's ministers in the House, as he was desirous of hearing what support the petition was to receive from them, and what answer they could make to its statements. The petition complained of their conduct as the cause of much suffering. It set forth, that almost all of which it complained arose from the line of conduct pursued by ministers, and from the want of a proper representative system. It was not too much for him to say, that it emanated from as respectable a set of men as any in England. The members of the corporation amounted to 262; and they had all, with the exception of about 12, agreed to this petition. Many of them had been annually returned for fifty consecutive years; and whatever gentlemen might think of the city parliament, the elections were made in the different wards without riot and confusion. He would not then make all the use he might of this fact, in support of the principle of annual elections; but he would say, that when men were annually re-elected to offices of trust by those to whom they
126
The petition being read,
Mr. Alderman Wood
apologised for again troubling the House; but he now saw some of his majesty's ministers in their places, and should be glad to hear them express their opinions on the petition.
Mr. Secretary Canning
disclaimed any intention of not doing full honour to the worthy alderman and to the city; but he could not conceive any necessity for him to listen to the petition, as he had read it in all the newspapers some months ago.
Mr. Creevey
thought, that one of the most important features in the petition was the statement applying to the population of England. It appeared, that between the year 1700 and the present time, our population had increased from five to twelve millions; and yet, during this increase of the population, the industry, and the wealth of the country, the elective franchise (as regarded the number of persons enjoying it) had been stationary, if not abating. For instance, 1,900 men in the county of Cornwall elected more members among them than were elected by one half the other counties in England; and this while new towns of immense consideration had sprung up, which were kept without any elective franchise at all. If these new towns, with populations of three or four hundred thousands—towns which contributed largely to the income, to the power, to the security of the state—if the inhabitants of these towns were totally shut out from the elective franchise, while 1,900 (he believed he might say) of the most worthless individuals in the country enjoyed an enormous, monopoly of it, surely all this called for something like revision. That part of the petition which complained of the
127
Mr. T. Wilson
said, he would be in his place at every discussion of reform, and would give his opinion to the best of his ability.
Lord John Russell
said, he saw so little objection to the proposal of Mr. Creevey, that he would move for the committee in question to-morrow. It gave him infinite satisfaction to see the growing interest which all classes were taking in the question of reform.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.]—
The order of the day was read, for going into a Committee of Supply. On the motion, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair,"
Mr. Creevey
rose to express his surprise at the mode in which ministers now-a-days called upon the House for supplies. He believed there was scarcely a difference of opinion upon the state of the country;
128
129
130
131
132
"Mr. Speaker
;—I have been hitherto silent in this matter of undertaking, wherein the House is much enwrapped first, because, to be plain with you, I did not well understand what it meant or what it was, and I do not love to offer at that that I do not thoroughly conceive—that private men should undertake for the Commons of England! Why, a man might as well undertake for the four elements. It is a thing so giddy and so vast, it cannot enter into the head of a sober man, and especially in a new parliament, when it was impossible to know who should be of the parliament; and when all men that know ever so little the constitution of this House, do know it to be so open to reason, as men do not know when they enter into these doors, what mind themselves will be of until they hear things argued and debated; much less can any man make a policy of assurance what ship shall come safe into the harbour in these seas. There were undertakers for the plantations of Derry and Coleraine, in Ireland, the better to command and bridle those pacts; but for the ancient parliament of England, which moves in a certain manner and sphere, to be undertaken, it passes my reach to conceive what it should be. Must there be some forts built in this House that may command and contain the rest? Mr. Speaker, I know but two forts in this House, which the king ever hath—the fort of affection, and the fort of reason: the one commands the hearts, and the other commands the heads; and others I know none. Then for the king, nothing can be more opposite to his ends and hopes than this, for you have heard him profess like a king, and like a gracious king—that he Both not so much respect his present supply as the demonstration, that the people's hearts are more knit to him than before. Now, then, if the issue shall be this, that whatsoever shall be done for him, shall be thought to be done but by a number of persons that shall be laboured and packed, this will be rather a sign of diffidence and alienation, than of a natural
133
l.
The Speaker
having put the amendment, strangers were ordered to withdraw; when Mr. Creevey said, he should not give the House the trouble of dividing; but would content himself with recording his own sentiments upon the Journals, and letting his amendment be negatived.
134
Mr. Canning
said, he did not propose to answer what had fallen from the hon. gentleman, because he believed no one who had heard his speech, could understand any practical benefit which he had proposed by it. He did not mean, if the amendment had not been withdrawn, to have opposed it; nor should he have added another word, but for the mention which had been made of one exalted personage, whose name he could not use consistently with the forms of parliament. That personage had been singularly, and he thought unconstitutionally, introduced into the speech just delivered. He should have thought, that, in common justice, the sacrifices which had been made by the crown for a series of years, and the disposition which had been unceasingly manifested for the reduction of every unnecessary expense, deserved from the hon. gentleman very different treatment.
Mr. W. Lamb
expressed his surprise at the line of argument adopted by the hon. member for Appleby. It was most unsatisfactory and inconclusive to go back to the period when the privilege of purveyance existed—that privilege which gave to the agents of the monarch the right to seize, in every market or other place, provisions and other things necessary for the supply of the court; and which was, of all other branches of the prerogative, the most tyrannical and intolerable. Nothing could be more marked than the distinction between those times and our own. The Revolution had altered the situation in which the granting of supplies had previously been placed. Before that period, the crown had been possessed of large territories, from which it derived considerable revenues, and which could be made available in cases of emergency. The abolition of the feudal tenures had deprived it of this revenue, and had thrown it upon the liberality of parliament for the support of its honour and dignity. To hesitate to vote the supplies, would be to doubt the propriety of giving effect to the operations of the government.
Mr. Hume
said, that the state of the crown lands was one of those subjects which called for the attention of the House, and which ought to be looked to before the supplies were granted. They had been given up by the crown; and, by an act of the first of queen Anne, they had been placed apart, for the express purpose of relievin the burdens of the people. He did not
135
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
(Mr. Robinson) begged to remind the hon. gentleman, that the government had given its cordial assent to one of the measures of economy winch had been recommended, and had carried it into effect by an act of parliament. As to the first topic, that of the crown lands, the hon. gentleman was entirely mistaken. The revenue arising from them was regularly carried to account. He was no holder of crown lands, but he knew many individuals who were; and he would venture to state, that of all the severe landlords in the country, the crown was the most so. It was provided by law, that they should be let to the highest bidder. The last holder of the lease had the option of taking a renewal at the rate fixed on by a
136
l.,
The motion was negatived, and the House resolved itself into the committee of supply.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, February 18, 1823.
BANK BALANCES.]—
Mr. Grenfell
, in moving for a return of the Balances of the public money in the hands of the Bank of England, observed, that in 1815, when he first brought this subject under the consideration of the House, the deposits lodged with the Bank amounted to no less a sum than eleven or twelve millions. The loss to the public from this source was estimated by the committee on the public expenditure, at more than 500,000
l.
l.;
137
l.
l.,
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that as he had no objection to the production of the papers, he should decline entering at present into the subject. He stood in need of all the information which could be afforded him; and he felt that none could be more valuable than that of the hon. gentleman. When the papers should have been produced, if the hon. gentleman thought proper to submit a motion on the subject to the house, it would be his duty to state the conduct he proposed to pursue.
Mr. Baring
expressed Ins surprise, that his hon. friend had again made that statement to the House which had been so often refuted. The subject of the balances in the hands of the Bank was one of which he had not lost sight for many years. He had stated, that these balances had formerly amounted to 11,000,000
l.,
l.
l.,
138
Mr. Manning
said, that the deposits of the balances of public money were necessarily made with the Bank, because the government could not safely intrust them to any private hands. When the accounts should be produced, he would show, and he hoped satisfactorily, that the Bank was justified, by their charter, in all they had done.
Mr. Ricardo
said, it was true the Bank had made a compensation for the grant of the charter; but it was not sufficiently great for the advantages they had so long possessed. If, during his continuance in office, the Bank of England should apply for a renewal of the charter, he hoped the chancellor of the exchequer would be particularly careful that they did not overreach him. Before any such bargain should be made, it would be the duty of the right hon. gentleman to consult the House as to the terms of it. If it should be open to public competition, much more would be given for it than had ever yet been offered. From the advantages which the Bank had derived, it was impossible not to see, that the terms had been very much in their favour.
Mr. Grenfell
, in reply, said, that the warmth with which his hon. friend (Mr. Baring) defended the proceedings of the Bank was not at all surprising, when it was recollected, that he was a director during the period of the transactions of which he had so often complained. He was a party to all that had been done, whether it were good or ill. His hon. friend went back to the charter, and the terms upon which it had been made with Mr. Pitt, and concluded, therefore, that the question of balances was closed. But, did he recollect that, eight years before that period, the Bank had agreed to give up three millions without any interest whatever? Did he recollect that Mr. Vansittart, after having always denied the
139
d.
d.
d.
d.
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Maberly
wished the Bank to have a good bargain, and thought they should be liberally treated; but he thought also, that it was the duty of the chancellor of the exchequer to ascertain whether the act relative to the rate to be paid for management was conclusive, upon which he understood the highest legal opinions were divided. He had no doubt that 100,000
l.
Mr. Hume
would take that opportunity of throwing out a suggestion, that it was probable the Bank charter might never be renewed. A million and a half might be saved by the establishment of a national bank. He knew some notions had got abroad respecting the danger of such an establishment; but when it was recollected that they had an annual payment of 60,000,000
l.,
Mr. J. Martin
wished to know, whether
140
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
could not give at that moment a positive answer to the question of the hon. member.
Mr. J. Martin
intimated his intention to make a motion on the subject.
Mr. Manning
said, that the subject had been under the consideration of the bank directors, and that an order had been issued to prepare such account.
Mr. Grenfell
said, it had been observed, that a difference of opinion existed between legal authorities, as to the liability of the Bank to have the charge for the management of the public debt re-examined and altered. He very well knew, that an opinion had been given on this subject. Sir Samuel Shepherd, when attorney-general, and the present attorney-general, at that period solicitor-general, gave it as their opinion, on the case which had been laid before them, that the system could not he interfered with. But the opinion of no legal man was infallible; and the view which a lawyer took of any question must depend on the way in which the case was put. When he saw that case and opinion, it struck him that the question was not stated in the way in which it ought to have been; and he thought that if it had been drawn up properly, the legal opinion would have been, that the act of 1808, did not close the question; but that the subject was open to revision.
Mr. Manning
said, it ought to be stated, that that case was not drawn up by the Bank, nor submitted to counsel, with the privity of the Bank. It was the work of other parties; they were not responsible for it. After the opinion given, gentlemen must feel considerable doubts whether any alteration could take place in the charge for managing the public debt.
The several motions were agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, February 19, 1823.
LIEUTENANT-GENERAL OF THE ORDNANCE.]—
Mr. Hume,
in rising to submit the question he was about to propose to the House, trusted he should have credit for having given the subject much consideration; and he assured the House it was one well worthy its attention. By an act of the 45th year of the late king, a com-
141
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
142
143
l.
144
145
l.:
l.
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
146
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
147
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
148
l.,
l.
Mr. Ward
said, he rose for the purpose of opposing the motion of the hon. gentleman on the most plain and palpable ground. The hon. gentleman, in express terms, stated, that the commissioners of military inquiry had declared, "that the appointment of lieutenant-general of the ordnance in time of war was unnecessary." Now, out of the hon. member's own mouth would he convict him; for, on looking to the report from which he had quoted, it would be found that his statement of the declaration of the commissioners was not the fact, but that the
149
150
151
152
153
154
l.
l.
l.
155
l.
l.
156
l.
157
l.
l.
158
Mr. J. Williams
said, that a feeling was abroad, that, under existing circumstances, the expenditure of every unnecessary farthing was not merely a pressure on the nation, but an insult upon its understanding. Yet, this was the season in which the hon. gentleman opposite, with so much ingenuity and apparent triumph, had thought proper to treat with so much jocularity a subject of this important nature. If the hon. gentleman, in speaking of the report of the commissioners, meant to say, that the distinguished persons by whom it had been prepared, were not, in truth, competent to report upon the ordnance establishment, why did he not at once move that the subject should be re-considered? The hon. gentleman had said, that the commissioners had adhered to the opinion of lord Chatham in the statement which they had made as the result of that noble lord's evidence before them. Now he (Mr. Williams) contended, that, with the exception of certain generalities in that evidence, where the noble lord had not condescended to make any specific statements, it resulted, that the noble lord's opinion on the subject was always delivered upon the presumption of the absence of the master-general of the ordnance. The hon.
159
160
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, that although he should be perfectly content to go to the vote upon this question in the state in which it had been left by his hon. friend, yet having himself, upon a former evening, been particularly called on by the hon. member for Aberdeen, to account for the nomination that was now the subject of inquiry—having been, at that time, wholly unprepared to give an answer to the demand so made—having since made it his business to render himself fully acquainted with the real facts of the case—and having, finally, come to a most conscientious and determined conviction, that a falser allegation was never made, than had been made against the office of lieutenant-general of the ordnance—he could not content himself with a silent vote on the present occasion. It would be in the recollection of the House, that the hon. gentleman had brought forward his charge on the former night, with almost every possible circumstance of aggravation. It was not only that an useless office had been revived and continued, after a committee appointed to inquire into the ordnance establishment had suggested its abolition—not only that this had taken place in defiance of all the general principles of economy, and of a specific recommendation of retrenchment in this particular—but that it had been done from the corruptest of motives, with the basest of purposes; that it had been given, at the instance of the government, to an individual wholly unworthy of the appointment. It was imputed to them, that it had been given to this individual for the sake of his family and parliamentary connexions. [Cries of "No, no," from the Opposition.] He affirmed most confidently, that the charge went forth, on that occasion, against the government, and against lord
161
162
163
164
165
166
l.
167
l.
Mr. Hume
rose to reply. He could assure the House, it was not his intention, in the few remarks he had to offer, to imitate the example of the right hon. gentleman, by putting himself in a passion. The right hon. gentleman had talked of falsehood, and calumny, and misrepresentation, and other epithets which were wholly unworthy of him. Let him not imagine, however, that he (Mr. H.) was to be driven from his duty by such a mode of argument. He could not have imagined that the right hon. gentleman would have felt so much annoyed by
168
169
170
Mr. Macdonald
said, that with a disposition to save every farthing that could be spared, consistently with the efficient management of the several public departments, he felt himself, in common with sundry friends around him, somewhat embarrassed by the wording of the present motion. The motion had, it was said, for its ground, the recommendation of a report of the commissioners of military inquiry. Now, before they decided upon that ground, it would be necessary to ascertain what was the object the commissioners had in view in making this recommendation. It appeared to him that time recommendation was a conditional one, and depended upon the re-modelling of the board of ordnance. How far such a measure might or might not be of advantage to the public service, he would not stop to inquire; but he knew that the re-modelling had not taken place. This being so, and having, on the one hand, a regard for every possible saving of the public money, as great as that of his hon. friend, and, on the other, a disposition not to pass undeserved censure on the master-general of the ordnance, or on his majesty's ministers, he could not vote for such a motion without further inquiry. The commissioners had examined lords Chatham and Moira, who gave opinions not much unlike; but the duke of Wellington might, have reasons for agreeing with, or differing from both. With the experience which his situation must have given him, he did not see why the opinion of the duke should
171
Mr. Canning
said, that he, for one, could not consent to the motion being withdrawn.
The amendment was negatived. After which, the House divided on Mr. Hume's motion: Ayes 73; Noes 200. Majority against the motion, 127.
List of the Minority.
Allan, J. H.
James, W.
Althorp, visc.
Jervoise, G. P.
Astell, W.
Lemon, sir W.
Baring, H.
Lewis, W.
Barratt, S. M.
Maberly, J.
Benyon, B.
Maberly, W. L.
Bernal, R.
Mahon, hon. S.
Birch, J.
Marjoribanks, S.
Boughey, sir J.
Martin, J.
Bright, H.
Maxwell, J.
Byng, G.
Milton, visc.
Calvert, C.
Monck, J. B.
Chaloner, R.
Nugent, lord
Creevey, T.
Palmer, C. F.
Curwen, J. C.
Pelham, hon. C. A.
Cradock, S.
Pelham, J. C.
Davies, T. H.
Pym, F.
Denison, W. J.
Ramsbottom, John
Denman, T.
Ricardo, D.
Duncannon, visc.
Rickford, W.
Dundas, C.
Roberts, A. W.
Ebrington, visc.
Robarts, G. J.
Ellice, E.
Robinson, sir G.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Rowley, sir W.
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Sefton, earl
Glenorchy, visc.
Smith, J.
Grattan, J.
Smith, G.
Guise, sir W.
Smith, hon. R.
Haldimand, W.
Stanley, lord
Hamilton, lord A.
Tynte, C. K.
Heron, sir R.
Webbe, E.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Wells, J.
Honywood, W. P.
Whitbread, S. C.
Hurst, R.
Williams, J.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Wilson, sir R.
172
Winnington, sir T.
TELLERS.
Wood, M.
Bennet, hon. H, G,
Wyvil, M.
Hume, Jos.
Wigram, W.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, February 20, 1823.
RIGHT OF VOTING.]—
Lord J. Russell
said, that if he were not aware that opposition was likely to be made to the motion of which he had given notice, he should not have troubled the House with a single observation in support of it. He was about to move for a plain arithmetical statement, of the number of voters who returned members to the several cities and boroughs, and the right of voting as it was usually exercised in those cities and boroughs. To such a motion he should not have conceived that any objection could be made. Understanding, however, that it was to be opposed, he should state shortly the grounds and precedents upon which he was entitled to call for such a return. A remarkable facility had been afforded of late years, on the other side of the House, in granting papers and documents which were calculated to afford information on any subject which was brought under its consideration. He would mention one or two instances of recent occurrence which were directly in point. His noble friend (lord A. Hamilton), who had shown so laudable though so fruitless a zeal, for the reform of the representation in Scotland, had a short time ago moved for a return of the number of freeholders who returned the county members of Scotland. His noble friend had obtained that paper, by which it appeared, that the county members of Scotland were returned on an average by 70 or 80 constituents. No longer ago than last night, his noble friend had obtained another return, showing the actual condition of the royal burghs of Scotland. Why, then, was he to be treated with less courtesy than his noble friend? Why was a return to be denied to him which was necessary for the consideration of the great question of reform? In the other house of parliament a committee had been appointed, in 1815, to search for records and documents relative to all matters touching the dignity of peers of the realm. The House of Lords had no fear for the investigation of the origin of their dignity, and accordingly a report came forth, under the auspices of lord
173
174
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, he had not refused to communicate to the noble lord whatever information might be necessary for the fair, candid and dispassionate meeting of the great question of parliamentary reform, which the noble lord had brought before the House for several years, and of which he had given a notice for the present session. In the remarks which he should take to the liberty of making upon the speech and motion of the noble lord, he should not be drawn into the larger question, but would confine himself to the specific motion before the House. Before he came to state the objections which he had to the motion itself, he could not help remarking that, if the present motion were carried, it would go to prejudice the people, with regard to what he trusted was the feeling, and would be the decision of the House, upon the great question. Undoubtedly, it would be agreed, that the carrying of the present motion, without opposition, would give a false impression to the public, on the subject of the great
175
176
Lord J. Russell
said, he did not mean to call for the production of the charter. The right hon. gentleman had misunderstood him if he supposed that such was the object of his motion.
Mr. Secretary Canning
was at a loss, then, to know what the noble lord really proposed to gain by his motion. The right was in most instances contained in the charters; and, unless he had strangely forgotten, when the noble lord gave notice of his motion some nights ago, the subject of the charters had been particularly put forward. In that notice, which he then held in his hand, the return of the charters had been specifically mentioned, together with the number of voters. If he meant, however, now to limit the power of the committee, and not to give them authority to inspect the charters, how would the result of their investigation be more satisfactory than the information already in the possession of the noble lord? The noble lord had said, he did not expect perfect accuracy in the return: his purpose, then, was answered by those accounts which were now floating about the country. He agreed that, if on a debate as to the expediency of a reform in parliament, it had been denied that the right of election was vested in small corporations, and placed in the power of a limited number Of voters, the noble lord would in that case have had a right to call for information; but it would be in the recollection of the House, that long before the question of reform had been under the protection of the noble lord, for the last thirty years, during which the debates upon this subject, though not quite annual, had been very frequent, there had never been one in which the fact of these small corporations, and the limited number of their voters, had been contested. For himself, and for all those who had taken the same view with himself of this question, they always set out with this admission. He would give the
177
178
Mr. Abercromby
confessed, that he had felt a considerable degree of curiosity to know what con hi possibly be the grounds upon which the right hon. gentleman would oppose the motion of his noble friend; as the information required was so perfectly harmless, and the motion itself was in reality so detached from all other subjects. He had thought that there could be no rational opposition to it; and the result had showed him that this opinion was correct. The right hon. gentleman had brought forward two objections; one of which existed wholly in his imagination; and the other proceeded upon an exaggeration, or rather, he would say, upon a misrepresentation; unintentional he was very willing to grant, but
179
180
181
Mr. Secretary Peel
thought that none of the objections of his right hon. friend had been removed. The hon. and learned gentleman had said, that these objections were visionary, inapplicable, and founded on exaggeration; but this he would deny. The hon. and learned gentleman had begun by throwing aside the general objection to the motion, and saying, that the noble mover was the judge of what information was best for his purpose; hut, would any one say, that information which was to be afforded by that House, should be framed to answer the private purposes of any member? If the object of the noble lord were obtained, it might be productive of the most serious consequences. The object was to expose the deformity of the boroughs; but, if' the noble lord meant, in his plan of reform, to retain the whole, or a part of these boroughs, he would ask if the exposure was prudent? The hon. and learned gentleman had denied, that any part of the noble mover's object was to expose the charters of the towns. Why, then, could not the information in that case be procured without the intervention of a committee? Did he not propose to follow this up by a power in the committee to examine persons, papers, and records? How was it possible to limit a question which was in its nature so sweeping? Why, under a committee possessing such ample powers, might not the charters be produced and exposed? The charters of private persons were exposed only in cases of litigation, and those of the boroughs should be so only in cases of disputed election. The hon. and learned gentleman had said, that there was a precedent, in the case of the Scottish county representation; but in that case there was no difficulty, and nothing to disclose. The whole of the voters were enrolled in the list of freeholders; and the information which had been obtained with regard to them, was not obtained through the medium of a committee. In the appointment of this committee, therefore, there must be some ulterior object—some other end in view. If this were not the case, why had the noble lord never thought of the committee till the present session? The House ought to pause, and consider, that the
182
Lord J. Russell
said, that if the gentlemen opposite would agree to afford the returns for which he had moved, he would give up the committee.
Mr. Peel
could not pledge himself as to the opinion he would give upon any motion which was not before the House; but he would meet it on its own merits when it was brought forward.
Mr. Creevey
said, that when he had on a former evening addressed the House on the subject of the petition of the city of London, he had stated, that the population of Great Britain had increased, from the year 1700 to the present time, from 5,000,000 to 12,000,000; and yet that, during this enormous addition to our people, the monopoly of the elective franchise in cities and boroughs had been stationary, or had rather decreased; that, by way of example, whilst Manchester, Sheffield, Birmingham, and Leeds, had arrived at that degree of wealth and consequence, that they might justly be considered the strength of the nation, in talent, enterprise, and industry, 1,900 voters in the county of Cornwall retained a monopoly of the elective franchise, by which they sent to parliament as many members as were returned by one-half of the counties of England, and the great towns to which he had referred returned none at all. They had the population returns laid before them last session; and why, he wished to know, should there not be produced as accurate a return as could be possibly made out of time number of voters in each borough? The right hon. gentleman, and his right hon. colleague, who had supported him in opposing the motion, stood forward and said, "We will admit the number of voters in boroughs to be as few as you please to assert." But, was the House to be thus satisfied? This was the first time he had ever heard that, because a minister of the crown thought proper to say, "I admit such a
183
184
185
186
Lord Milton
said, he merely rose for the purpose of ascertaining precisely what the real ground was upon which his noble friend's motion was to be resisted. He felt it extremely difficult to reconcile the ground of opposition laid down by the right hon. member for Harwich, with that which had been adopted by the right hon. member for Oxford. The first defended the present borough system, on the broad ground that it was fitting such a state of things should exist; while the other right hon. gentleman took quite a different course, and asked, "Will it be prudent to expose the defective state of the representation?" Now, was the motion to be resisted on the ground of its being imprudent to expose those defects, or for the reasons advanced by the right hon. member for Harwich? That right hon. gentleman stated, that the House had at present all the information which it was possible to collect on the subject, and that he would have no objection to more accurate information, if he could devise
187
The House divided:—Ayes, 90; Noes, 128. Majority against the motion, 38.
List of the Minority.
Allan, J. H.
Farrand, R.
Althorp, visc.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Barratt, S. M.
Folkestone, visc.
Becher, W. W.
Glenorchy, visc.
Belgrave, visc.
Hamilton, lord A.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Heathcote, J. G.
Benett, J.
Heron, sir R.
Benyon, B.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Bernal, R.
Honywood, W. P.
Boughey, sir J.
Hornby, Ed.
Browne, Dom.
Hume, J.
Calcraft, J. H.
Hurst, R.
Carter, J.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Caulfield, hon. H.
James, W.
Chaloner, R.
Johnstone, W. A.
Clifton, lord
Lamb, hon. G.
Coke, T. W.
Langstone, T. H.
Colborne, N. R.
Latouche, R.
Creevey, T.
Lawley, F.
Cradock, S.
Lethbridge, sir T.
Davies, T. H.
Leycester, R.
Denison, W. J.
Lushington, S.
Denman, T.
Maberly, John
Duncannon, visc.
Maberly, W. L.
Dundas, C.
Macdonald, James
Ebrington, visc.
Marjoribanks, S.
Ellice, E.
Martin, J.
Ellis, hon. G. A.
Milton, visc.
188
Maxwell, John
Robarts, A. W.
Monck, J. B.
Robarts, G. J.
Moore, Peter
Robinson, sir G.
Newman, R. W.
Scarlett, J.
Normanby, visc.
Sebright, sir J.
Nugent, lord
Sefton, earl
Ord, Wm.
Smith, W.
Palmer, C. F.
Stewart, W.
Pares, T.
Warre, J. A.
Pelham, J. C.
Whitmore, W. W.
Philips, G.
Williams, John
Philips, G. H.
Williams, W.
Price, Robt.
Wilson, sir R.
Prittie, hon. F. A.
Winnington, sir T.
Pym, Francis
Wyvill, M.
Ramsden, J. C.
Rice, T. S.
TELLERS.
Ricardo, D.
Russell, lord J.
Rickford, W.
Abercromby, J.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, February 21, 1823.
ALTERATIONS OF THE CURRENCY—
Lord Folkestone
said, he held in his hand the petition of a gentleman of the name of Thomson, to which he wished to call the particular attention of the House. The case of this gentleman was one of extreme hardship; and although gentlemen might have some difficulty in making up their minds as to the mode of giving relief, he thought, when they had attended to the case, they would almost unanimously agree that something ought to be done for him. He thought the House would agree, that this was a case in which the petitioner was entitled to relief; for he had been involved in these difficulties by no fault or extravagance of his own, but by the delays of the court of chancery, and the depreciation which had taken place in the value of property. The hon. member for Hertfordshire had come to him (lord F.) in the course of the preceding day, and stated, that he did not think this by any means a case of hardship; for that Mr. Thomson had made a wild, improvident purchase, and that his misfortunes were the necessary consequences of his own rash speculations. He had made inquiries with a view to ascertaining the correctness of this statement, and he would leave the House to judge from the petition itself, whether the case of the petitioner was that of a rash speculator in land, who had no claim to relief.—The petition was from Charles Andrew Thomson, of Chiswick, in the county of Middlesex; and the allegations of it were as follow:—
189
l.;
190
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.
l.;
l.
l.
191
l.,
l.,
l.
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.;
192
Ordered to lie on the table.
NAVY ESTIMATES.]—
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply,
Sir J. Osborn
said, that the estimate for the service of the navy differed somewhat from that voted last year. The number of seamen proposed this year amounted 25,000 men, instead of 21,000, the disturbed state of South America, the West Indies, and the Mediterranean having rendered the addition of 4,000 men necessary. There was also a small increase in the rate of wages, amounting to 6
d.
l.
s.
Mr. Brougham
was rather surprised that a larger number of seamen had not been voted, considering the alarming state of Europe. Indeed, when he reflected upon that most alarming state, he felt a difficulty in reconciling a vote for so small a number of seamen, with the dangers to which the commerce, and eventually the honour and safety of the country, might be exposed. There was still, however, this alternative, and it was a consolatory one, that the supply which any emergency might call forth, was not limited by this vote. The voting of 25,000 men that night, did not take away the power of increasing the number to any extent that
193
Mr. Secretary Canning
said:—I take occasion, Sir, from the few sentences which have fallen from the hon. and learned member, to offer my acknowledgments for the manner in which he has expressed his opinion. Undoubtedly, the present vote no more limits the liberality of parliament, than it limits the capacity of the country. If an occasion should arise to render it necessary to enlarge the supply, there will be no hesitation, on the part of ministers, to come down to this House with an explanation of the circumstances that require an increased vote. But having said this, for the purpose of obviating any possible mistake that might be entertained as to the powers of this House, I am sure the committee will pardon me if I stop here—assuring them, that the present state of Europe is one, on which the discussions in this House can produce no greater effect than has been already produced by preceding discussions; but on which they may possibly do harm. Much as it is the wish, and much as it is the want, of this country, as well as of Europe,
194
The several resolutions were agreed to.
FINANCIAL, SITUATION OF THE COUNTRY.]—
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Ways and Means,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
rose, and addressed the committee as follows:
*
Mr. Brogden
;— If, sir, I do not, upon the present occasion, ask any peculiar indulgence from the House, it is not that I do not feel how much I stand in need of it; but it is because I feel, that, having voluntarily undertaken to discharge the duties of the office which I now hold, I am necessarily bound at the same time to incur all the responsibility that may belong to it. I trust, however, that I may venture to ask for a patient and a candid hearing; patient, because I fear I must detain the committee for a considerable time; and candid, on account of the great importance of the subjects upon which it will be my duty to enlarge. And I own that I am the more anxious to request that attention from the committee, because it is impossible that I should not feel under what disadvantage I address the House upon a subject of this nature, when I recollect that I stand in the place of one, whose many talents,—whose long experience,—whose amiable character, and whose unsullied integrity, claimed for him and obtained for so many years the respect and esteem of the House. I confess, however, that I make my appeal with some confidence, because I must acknowledge with gratitude, that whenever, upon former occasions, it has been my lot to address myself to the House, I have always experienced the kindest and most encouraging reception. The best return that I can make for the attention which I may now receive, is by being as brief and intelligible as possible. Brevity is always desirable in opening any large and varied question to the House; and there is no subject upon which a minister is more bound to be clear, explicit, and intelligi-
*
195
It appears, from that return, that the total revenue amounted to
54,414,650
The total expenditure to
49,499,130
The surplus to
£.4,915,520
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
196
Total charge of funded unredeemed debt, including interest, long annuities, and management
£.28,124,786
Other charges on the consolidated fund, such as civil-list, pensions by act of parliament, and various items of that description
2,050,000
Annuity to trustees for half-pay and pensions
2,800,000
Army
7,362,000
Navy
5,442,000
Ordnance
1,380,000
Miscellaneous
1,494,000
Interest of exchequer bills
1,200,000
£.49,852,786
The result, then, is this, that taking the revenue at
57,000,000
The expenditure at
49,852,786
The surplus will be
£.7,147,214
l.,
197
l.,
l.
l.,
198
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l:
l.:
l.
199
l.
l.;
l.
l.,
l.,
l.;
l.:
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
Customs
10,500,000
Excise
26,000,000
Stamps
6,600,000
Post-office
1,400,000
Assessed taxes
5,900,000
Land tax
1,200,000
Miscellaneous
600,000
£.52,200,000
200
"The wide, the unbounded prospect lies before me,"
"Shadows, clouds, and darkness rest upon it."
201
202
203
For 1818
£.1,327,621
1819
1,231,991
1820
1,097,773
1821
1,069,282
l.
primâ facie
204
Army
£.7,362,000
Navy
5,442,000
Ordnance
1,380,000
Miscellaneous
1,494,000
205
ipse dixit
animus
l.;
l.
As compared with 1821 it is
£.1,957,000
1820
2,971,000
1819
2,156,000
1818
2,449,000
With the estimate of the Committee of Finance of 1817
1,335,000
l.,
l.
206
207
ex officio,
208
per se
209
l.
s.
l.,
l.
s.
l.
210
s.
l.;
On male servants
£.159,500
Clerks and shopmen of traders
98,050
Four-wheeled carriages
145,000
Two-wheeled carriages
98,000
High taxed carts
17,650
Horses for riding or drawing
324,000
Ponies under thirteen hands high, the high duty
9,100
Bailiffs' horses
1,050
Butchers' horses
4,400
Horses and mules, lower duty in agriculture and trade jointly, and trade wholly
72,500
211
l.;
l.
l.;
212
213
Mr. Maberly
said, that, before he adverted to the part of the subject which he
214
l.,
l.,
l.
215
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
216
l.
l.
217
l.
l.,
1. "That by the resolutions voted by this House in the year 1819, it was deemed expedient that an efficient sinking fund should be created to the amount of five millions.
2. "That at the time in question, it was agreed unanimously, that the only sinking fund which can be efficient, is, that which is produced by a surplus of income over expenditure.
3. "That, as far as can be collected from the papers laid upon the table of the House, there actually exists a sum of about five millions, applicable to the reduction of the national debt.
4. "That, in addition to these five millions, applicable to the reduction of the debt, there is at the disposition of parliament, arising from the increased productiveness of several branches of revenue, and the various plans of reform and economy in the administration of the
218
l.
5. "That it appears, therefore, that a total sum of 7,200,000
l.
6. "That although it was determined, that the capital stock purchased by the commissioners for the redemption of the national debt, with this efficient sinking fund, should be transferred to their account, it was nevertheless understood, that the interest payable upon stock so purchased, should either determine at the time of purchase, or be paid over and become part of the consolidated fund.
7. "That taking 80
l.
l.
l.
8. "That in the year 1798, for the support of public credit, there was passed an act for the redemption and purchase of the land tax, which act, from the exorbitant conditions attached to such redemption and purchase, has, in a great measure, failed in effecting the destined object.
9. "That notwithstanding the obstacles thus created, such has been the anxiety of the public to redeem their land, and to purchase landed securities, that the sum redeemed and purchased amounts to 700,000
l.
10. "That if so large a proportion of the hind tax has been redeemed and purchased, at a sacrifice in the first instance of 10
l.
l.
l.
11. "That it appears that 1,239,701
l.
l.
12. That it appears that-this method of reducing debt by no means differs in its substance from that which was adopted
219
13. "That as the mode of redeeming the national debt by redemption and purchase of land tax injures no class of proprietors, and will absorb a quantity of debt nearly equal to that which would be redeemed by an efficient sinking fund of five millions, annually laid out during seven years, it is expedient to substitute it for the sinking fund adopted in the resolutions of the House of 1819.
14. "That by this substitution there may he remitted to the people, in alleviation of their distress, seven millions of taxes."
Mr. Ricardo
said, he remembered, that at the termination of the last session, he had frequently to repel the attacks which were made upon the science of political economy. He had been delighted, however, to hear the plain, sound, practical; and excellent speech, which had been delivered by the right hon. gentleman opposite; and he thought that the science of political economy had never before had so able an expositor as it had now he found in that House. He thought that there never yet had been in that House a minister filling the situation which was held by the right hon. gentleman, who had in that capacity delivered sentiments so candid, so wise, and so excellent. In all the statements which he had made, it was impossible not to follow him with the greatest ease and safety; for it was in all these quite clear, that each of them was, in fact, as the right hon. gentleman had put it. But, there was this one difference—an important one, certainly—between him and the right hon. gentleman. The right hon. gentleman had stated the surplus of our income over our expenditure at 7,000,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
220
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
221
l.
l.
Mr. Baring
thought it impossible for any one to have given an explanation more clear or satisfactory, than that which they had heard from the chancellor of the exchequer: He concurred, however, with the hon. member for Portarlington, in doubting very much the amount or accumulation of interest which the right hon. gentleman included in his statement of the sinking fund. He concurred with his hon. friend in thinking, that we had a
222
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.;
223
l.
l.
l.
224
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he had forgotten to mention, that it was his intention to propose a measure which would have the effect of simplifying the operations of the sinking fund.
Mr. Robertson
contended in favour of the necessity of supporting the landed interest—an interest upon which, after all, the government must principally rely for its resources.
Mr. Hume
commenced by observing, that he had never heard a statement from ministers with more pleasure than he had heard that of the right hon. gentleman opposite. Never had he heard in that House a statement more clear or more satisfactory from any chancellor of the exchequer. He could not, however, help expressing his regret, at hearing it stated, in answer to what had been said by the hon. member for Portarlington, that the sinking fund was, as it was now constituted, calculated to support public credit. He contended, that the present sinking fund only tended to encourage extravagance; by placing at the disposal of ministers, a sum of money which it was likely, if not certain, they would apply to any thing but its proper use. To prove the inefficacy of the sinking fund, he had only to state, that the late chancellor of the exchequer had, in one year, taken 8,000,000
l.
l.
225
l.,
226
Mr. T. Wilson
said, that although he was connected with the shipping interest of the country, and well knew that it was labouring under considerable embarrassment, he felt that he should ill discharge his duty to his country, by giving his consent to that repeal of the duties upon shipping to which the hon. member had alluded. The repeal of those duties which pressed only on one particular class would afford nothing more than a partial relief; whilst the repeal of the taxes, which had been proposed by the chancellor of the exchequer, would afford relief at once to the mercantile, the manufacturing, and the agricultural part of the community. He trusted, however, that if the duties upon shipping should be allowed to remain in full force, the collection of them would be attended with as little expense as possible. It appeared to him, that 21 per cent was much too high a sum to be expended for such a purpose.
Sir H. Parnell
was anxious to say how
227
228
229
Lord Folkestone
concurred with all that had been said by preceding speakers, regarding the luminous arrangement and the good feeling, which pervaded the speech of the chancellor of the exchequer. At the same time, he felt considerable disappointment, that the right hon. gentleman's observations did not contain a single allusion to the distress under which the agricultural interest at present laboured. Indeed, he could scarcely collect from the right hon. gentleman's speech, whether he admitted or denied the existence of that distress. One part of it almost led him to suppose, that the right hon. gentleman denied it; for he had said, that the increased productiveness of the taxes had arisen from a greater consumption of the article upon which those taxes were imposed; and had thence inferred, that the country was rapidly progressing to an increased state of prosperity. Now he (lord F.) contended, that there was no natural connexion between these two subjects. He was aware, that it had long been the fashion with chancellors of the exchequer, to come down to the House, and to congratulate members upon the great sum which had been raised by the taxes. It appeared, however, to him, that this ought to be rather a subject of condolence than of congratulation; for though a minister might, with propriety, congratulate the country, if he had a productive revenue with a light taxation, he did not see what right he could have to do so, when the productiveness of the revenue arose from the heaviness of taxation. He should contend, that as things were at present managed, the distress of the agriculturists increased in the same proportion as the revenue was abundant. It was now the fashion to cry up the necessity of maintaining the public credit unimpaired, and to cry down all those who ventured even to hint a syllable in derogation of such a doctrine. Now, he asserted, that it was not fair to push the doctrine too far. Two years ago he had stated to the House two cases, in which it would not only not be fair, but would be positively unjust, to maintain what was called public credit, with the strictness which its advocates required. Those cases he would not now repeat; though at a fit opportu-
230
Mr. Grey Bennet
felt it his duty to remind the gentlemen opposite, who had talked so much about dealing honestly with the public creditor, that it was also their duty to deal honestly with the public debtor. The country, he maintained, was only bound to pay the debt which it had borrowed; and he would never allow more to be exacted from it by any shuffling trick regarding the public currency, to which parliament might have consented, by lending its aid to the government to despoil at one time the public creditor, and at another the public debtor. He would never allow time people to be stripped of the last farthing of their property by a system which had created greater misery, and inflicted greater spoliation, than had ever been inflicted upon any people by any system, invented under any form of government. The question of the currency must come again and again before the consideration of parliament. The people of England would not consent to be robbed in the manner that was now attempted. County after county would petition, and demand from the House—not spoliation, but justice; and parliament would be compelled, in the long run, in spite of itself, to come to that equitable adjustment of contracts, which he now claimed at its hands for the people of England, not as a matter of indulgence, but as a matter of right. The people of England would not allow themselves to be stripped of their last shilling by an act, which the House had enacted ignorantly, and with no intention of robbing them; but which had produced all the effects of intended spoliation upon them and their fortunes. He should have been ashamed of himself, if he had left the House that night, without making this explicit declaration of his opinions. Those opinions he should be prepared at a proper time to state more fully, and to justify, by details and facts, which would prove, even with mathematical certainty,
231
Lord Milton
said, that it was so long since he had attended the House, that he hardly knew by whom he was supported, or to whom he was opposed. He had had two surprises that evening—the one, the speech of his hon. friend who had just sat down, and which he strongly deprecated; the other, and by far the more agreeable surprise, was the speech of the right hon. the chancellor of the exchequer. And here he could not let the opportunity pass, without offering the tribute of his praise to that right hon. gentleman, for the feelings which seemed to animate, and the spirit of enlarged policy which supported, the propositions he had that night made to the House. He contrasted with much gratification the policy by which ministers were now governed, with that on which they had formerly acted. He could not help feeling that the country had a new government—a government new in all its feelings, and in all its views on great public questions.—The right hon. gentleman, who had that night received and deserved so much praise, had advanced propositions which were sound and self-evident, but which had been denied last session by some of the most influential members of that House. The right hon. gentleman had truly said, that the diminution of taxation was the best, the only, relief for the pressing distress of the people Ministers seemed at length awake to questions over which last session they had slept. Having said so much with regard to the speech of the right hon. gentleman, he was obliged, however, to say, that he was disappointed as to the results to which the right hon. gentleman had led the House. In his opinion, the measure of relief proposed, was less than the country had a right to expect; and considerably less than what was necessary to give efficient relief. He would ask the country gentlemen who heard him, particularly those who represented Norfolk, Suffolk, Sussex, and some of the southern counties,
232
Sir R. Wilson
rose merely to make one observation. The chancellor of the exchequer had stated, that the reduction of taxation was the best mode of relief. He had also dwelt with satisfaction upon the tranquillity of the country. The right hon. gentleman, and those who acted with him, must feel, that to insure that tranquillity, and to promote the permanent prosperity of the state, it was necessary to bind the people to the government, and that that was only to be done by showing a regard for their liberties. He trusted, therefore, that ministers would take an early opportunity of repealing the laws called the Six Acts, and restoring to Englishmen the ancient free and constitutional laws of England.
Mr. Wodehouse
said, at the end of the
233
Mr. Benett,
of Wilts, expressed his satisfaction, that 50 per cent of the window tax was to be reduced. It was a most grievous and unequal tax; because a house in the most obscure part of the country, where it was of little or no value, was rated as highly to this tax, as one in the fashionable streets of the metropolis. It was, therefore, by no means an
ad valorem
234
The chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he rose to reply to a remark of an hon. gentleman, as to a pledge given last session. The means of facilitating the sale of beer had by no means escaped his attention; but he could at present say no more than that he was extremely anxious to find out a measure, which should give facilities to the consumption of beer; as well for the benefit of the consumer, as for the ultimate and indirect relief to the parties concerned in the production of malt.
The resolutions were then agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, February 24, 1823.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.]—
Earl Somers
presented a petition complaining of Agricultural Distress, agreed to at the Hereford county meeting on the 17th of January, at which meeting his lordship presided; he having agreed to summon it, pursuant to requisition, after the high sheriff had declined to call it. His lordship detailed the circumstances which took place at the meeting. He thought it right to do so, because he had refused to sign the petition, and because he objected to some of the allegations contained in it. The agricultural distress was undoubtedly very great; and though it might be said that, after a time, that distress would be alleviated; and though it was true, that great landholders might withstand the pressure, still it could not but excite the most melancholy feelings in men who were enabled to bear up against it, to see their neighbours continually falling one after another around them. He certainly did not mean to advocate any measure that could affect public credit; far from it. Public credit was to a nation, what private credit was to an individual; but let it be recollected, how much, during the war, public credit was supported by the landholders, who
235
l.
Ordered to lie on the table.
MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL.]—
The Archbishop of Canterbury
moved, that the committee on the law regarding
236
Lord Ellenborough
was anxious that there should be no misunderstanding with regard to the object of the bill presented by the right reverend prelate. The effect of it would be, that the old law regarding marriages would be restored, with the exceptions that the marriages could not be annulled, and that the surrogates, whose power of granting licences was taken away by the act of last session, would still not have the power of granting such licences. In all other respects the old law, with regard to the solemnization of marriages, would be restored.
The bill was read a first time.
DISPUTE BETWEEN FRANCE AND
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, that he rose for the purpose of putting some questions to the noble earl at the head of his majesty's government, relating to foreign affairs. He was sure the House would feel that it could not be his wish to provoke any premature discussion, which might by possibility interfere with any negotiations going on with a view to the preservation of peace. His object was to ascertain whether the same ground of hope that was stated on a previous night as a reason for not entering into particulars still existed; and he was the more anxious to abstain from any general discussion, if that should be the case, in consequence of the fortunate concurrence of opinion manifested by both houses of parliament at the commencement of the session. When he considered that three weeks had elapsed since the meeting of
237
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that on the first day the subject was introduced, he took the liberty, in answer to the noble marquis, of explaining the state of our foreign relations, as far as he conceived to be consistent with his public duty. He had then stated, that the door was not absolutely closed against the prospect of peace, and had deprecated any further discussion, as calculated to interfere with the exertions which his majesty's government were making towards the accomplishment of so desirable an object. Whatever difference of opinion might exist upon any other point, there was but one as to the propriety of maintaining a general peace. He, therefore, must again deprecate any further discussion, until it was evident that peace could not be preserved. He had no difficulty in stating, at the same time, that special circumstances had arisen, since the period before alluded to, and some of them very recently, which made him more adverse than before to any discussion of the existing differences between France and Spain. He would not shrink at a future day from explaining the grounds upon which his majesty's government had proceeded; but, as they all looked with anxiety to the preservation of what the noble marquis had called the peace of western Europe, he was sure their lordships would be induced to refrain from further observation; especially when he stated, that the forbearance which parliament had already shown, had afforded material advantages to his majesty's government in its negociations with foreign powers.
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, that it
238
The Earl of Liverpool
said, it would be impossible to give a detailed answer to that question, without entering into a review of the whole policy adopted by this government for a considerable period; but this much he would say generally, that, this government had entered into no engagement whatever, nor would they feel themselves justified in doing so, which could prevent them from taking any course that might hereafter appear necessary to the honour and character of the nation.
Lord Ellen borough
said, he did not rise for the purpose of putting any question, after the explanation of the noble earl; but he could not entertain any sanguine views, with respect to the preservation of peace between France and Spain, since the speech of the king of France. The noble earl had stated, that the same desire for a continuation of peace between France and Spain which was felt by his majesty's ministers, was also felt by the noble lords who generally opposed them. In that opinion he fully agreed; and he could say for himself, that he looked with the utmost anxiety to the prevention of any war, in the present state of the public feeling. But, if the mediation of England was conducted upon the principle of inducing Spain to give up any part of her constitutional privileges, we were as guilty of injustice, as the allied powers themselves; and the ministers, if they had so committed themselves, would incur a heavy responsibility.
239
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, February 24, 1823.
FOREIGN ENLISTMENT BILL.]—
Sir R. Wilson,
in rising to present a petition from the inhabitants of the parish of St. Saviour's, Southwark, begged to state to the House, that he had no concern whatever in originating the petition. It was a spontaneous act of men, who had never been backward to complain of whatever appeared to them to be injurious to national honour or to European liberty. They were not men of words, but would follow up what they said by actions. The petition prayed, that the Foreign Enlistment bill might be repealed. He would not enlarge upon the prayer of the petition. But he could not avoid calling the attention of the House to the degree to which that new infringement of international law had been stigmatised, at the time when it was introduced. It had been so, not only by the mass of the people, but by those brave defenders of their country, who were ever ready to support the cause of freedom, and the best interests of man. He could not help congratulating the House and the country upon the favourable aspect of the policy of this country, and be hoped that those manly and liberal professions would be amply fulfilled. At the present most important juncture, it would require both caution and firmness on the part of this country; and he would add that, if the obnoxious measure were not repealed, it would counteract, in no small degree, those liberal principles.
Mr. Hobhouse
begged to second the prayer of the petition, and at the same time to congratulate the House and the country upon the first step which had been taken, by rescinding the orders in council, to place England in a proper light in the eyes of Europe. It was a step absolutely necessary for the welfare of this country, and for the independence of the nations of the continent. For his own part, be thought, that nothing short of a war would satisfy the present infatuated government of France. He was convinced of the absolute necessity of repealing the Foreign Enlistment bill, the Alien bill, and all those other measures which had tended to connect this country with that impious league which, under the name of the Holy Alliance, had been formed against the happiness of mankind. When the Foreign Enlistment bill was pro-
240
241
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, that the hon. gentleman who had just sat down, had done ministers the honour to compliment them upon their conduct; and, among the good qualities which he had attributed to them, he had praised them for their prudence. He felt strongly, that that prudence forbad, at the present moment, any discussion on the subject, and he rose chiefly for the purpose of repressing any further discussion on a point which had originated accidentally. He should, however, act unfairly to that government of which he was so recent a member, if he did not reject any praise which was bestowed upon it, at the expense of those by whom it had formerly been composed. He was compelled in mere justice to say, that upon his entering the office which he had the honour to fill, he found the principles on which the government were acting, reduced into writing; and this state paper formed what he might be allowed to call the political creed of the ministers. Upon the execution of the principles there laid down, and upon that alone, was founded any claim he might have to credit from the House. With respect to the other topics which had been brought before the House, he felt he ought not to allow himself to be led into any discussion relating to them. Besides the general reasons which forbad any further debate while the smallest hope remained of compassing that pacific result in which the interests of Europe were so deeply concerned, there were some material circumstances which, at the present moment, made such debate particularly inexpedient. Before he sat down, he felt compelled to say that, in pursuing that policy for which the hon. gentleman had given them credit, his majesty's ministers had been aided by the forbearance—he would not say the unexpected forbearance—of the House.
Ordered to lie on the table.
NAVY ESTIMATES.]—
The report of the Committee of Supply on the Navy Estimates being brought up,
Mr. Hume
rose to notice one or two circumstances. The first was, the prac-
242
243
Sir G. Clerk
said, that with respect to certain promotions to which the hon. gentleman had alluded, it was unnecessary for him to enter into any explanation, as the hon. member intended to bring the subject under the consideration of the House by a specific motion. When the hon. member made that motion, the admiralty would be prepared to show, that they were perfectly justified in the course they had taken. Those promotions were made from persons belonging to the class of midshipmen, on those stations. If they were not so made, the vessels on foreign stations would soon be without officers. With respect to the question of the marines, if the hon. gentleman showed a fair parliamentary ground for requiring the information to which he had alluded, proper attention would be paid to it; but till he so introduced the question, it was impossible that a general answer could be given to it. The hon. gentleman observed, that alterations had been made in the navy estimates, by which the expense of wear and tear, &c. had been reduced, but that some new items were inserted in those estimates. The House, however, would find, that though the present estimate exceeded by 4,000 men the estimate of last year, yet there was a reduction on the former, as compared with the latter, of 220,000
l.
The resolutions were then agreed to.
RIOT AT THE DUBLIN THEATRE.]—
Mr. Brownlow
rose to move for a series of
244
Ex-officio
Mr. Plunkett
said, it was, he presumed, the intention of the hon. member to follow up the motion for the production of those papers with some ulterior proceeding, with respect to what had taken place in the court of King's-bench, Ireland, and the transactions that had occurred there. As the present motion was merely for the production of papers, it was not his intention to invite any debate on the subject which the hon. member meant to bring before the House. He begged leave to express his extreme satisfaction on finding it at length announced, that the question would be specifically brought forward. He was glad that it was in the hands of the hon. gentleman, who would discharge his duty to the House and the country, on this, as he did on all occasions, with perfect propriety. But he could not avoid expressing some degree of surprise, that it had devolved on him to bring the question forward; because, when, on a former occasion, an inquiry was made relative to the catholic question, a right hon. baronet was so eager to give an opinion on this case, which had nothing to do with the question which had been asked, that he could not help observing, that these proceedings were an improper course of proceeding. When that right hon. baronet, who was a member of the legal profession, and who at one period had tilled the office which he (Mr. P.) now held, felt it necessary to make this charge, that the proceedings were improper, he did expect that the right hon. baronet would have come forward himself in a manly manner, and abided by the charge he had thought fit to make. He was ready to meet the
245
Sir J. Stewart
said, he had not pledged himself to make any direct charge on the occasion alluded to. He felt himself justified in offering the remark which had occasioned the observations of the learned gentleman, because the state of Ireland had been referred to at the time; and because he was convinced, that the late proceedings had not produced a good effect. He would say, in the face of that House and of the world, that those proceedings, if not absolutely illegal, were certainly unconstitutional. This he felt himself compelled to state, though he entertained the most friendly regard for the learned gentleman. He admitted the great talents and the tried worth of the learned gentleman; but no private consideration should induce him to shrink from what he conceived to be his duty.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
suggested, whether it would not be prudent, en every account, not to press the discussion farther. The proposition was, that certain documents should be laid on the table. No objection was made to the production of those documents. The right hon. baronet had, however, taken the present opportunity to state, that the acts of the attorney-general of Ireland, if not strictly illegal, were highly unconstitutional. Now, he did not think it was placing the House in a fair situation, to call on them, thus prematurely, to discuss a question which was of such vital importance to the learned gentleman, to the government of which he formed a part, and to the interests of the country at large.
Mr. M. Fitzgerald
asked, as the parties were at issue, whether it was absolutely necessary, with regard to this question, to wait for the production of these papers? If it was not necessary, and if, in consequence of recent proceedings, the peace and tranquillity of the country had been disturbed, an expression of the opinion of that House ought to be sent forth as soon
246
ex officio
Mr. Croker
said, it seemed to him, that on a question of so much importance, papers should not be moved for on the sudden, and granted as a matter of course. No person could deny the right of that House to interfere with a legal proceeding, when a sufficient ground was laid; but he thought it would have been more consonant with the practice of parliament, and the law and constitution of the country, if the hon. member had given notice of motion. He strongly deprecated any interference,
per saltum,
Mr. Brownlow
said, that before he moved for these documents, he had been given to understand, that there was not the slightest objection to granting them. He would submit a motion to the House on the subject, on the earliest possible day after the recess.
Mr. Abercromby
doubted the propriety of the mode which the hon. member intended to take. If the hon. member meant to found on these papers a vote of censure on the Irish attorney-general, he (Mr. A.) should be placed in a very great difficulty. He felt that there was not any defect or illegality in the exercise of this power. It was not asserted, that the attorney-general had done what he was not legally entitled to do; but that he had lent himself to an unconstitutional proceeding. If that were the case, it involved an inquiry into the whole of the proceedings that had taken place; and, towards such an inquiry as that, the hon. member had made no advance whatever;
247
Mr. Brownlow
said, he intended to submit his motion, previous to the discussion on the catholic question.
The motion was agreed to.
IRISH YEOMANRY.]—
Mr. Hume
rose to move for returns of the names of all persons in the yeomanry service in Ireland, who received pensions in the nature of reward or retired allowances, the length of their respective services, the dates of appointments, &c. It appeared, he said, from parliamentary papers, that 1,278
l.
l.
Mr. Goulburn
said, he had no objection whatever to the production of the information called for. With respect to certain individuals to whom the hon. gentleman had alluded on a former night, he wished, in justice to the parties, to give some explanation. The hon. gentleman, when speaking of major Collis, had said, that the major was not entitled on account of infirmities (the reason assigned) to the allowance which he received; and he gave three reasons for that opinion: the first was, that the major was not above 40 years of age; the second, that he had served but a limited period in the yeomanry; and the third, that that officer, so far from being infirm, was in good bodily health. These facts were
248
Mr. Hume
said, that the case which the right hon. gentleman had just stated, was not that which he had mentioned on a former evening. His statement was, that major Collis had been pensioned after ten years' service, and that the Irish lawyers might as well call the major a woman, as a person entitled to the pension, according to the military regulations recognized by the act of parliament. It was not, however, of major Collis, but of major Bridgeman that he had spoken, as being a person, who, though retired "through infirmities," was as hale and as hearty as himself was, and only 45 years of age.
Mr. Goulburn
said, that the explanation, in either way, was inaccurate. Major Bridgeman had joined the British service in South Carolina, so far back as the year 1780: and had served ten years as a brigade-major in the Irish yeomanry; but, even after this length of service, there was the most positive certification of infirmities, from the high authority of Dr. Rennie, of Dublin. Major Bridgeman had fallen from his horse in a fit of apoplexy, while in the discharge of his military duty; and had many years-suffered from a constitutional determination of blood to his head, which had seriously affected his health, and rendered his retirement necessary.
The motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, February 25, 1823.
COLONIAL REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE.]—
Mr. Hume
rose for the purpose of calling the attention of the House to the situation of the colonies belonging to Great Britain, and the expense of their government. He understood that the opposition which had been offered to his motion for returns connected with this subject had been withdrawn, and that ministers had agreed to grant them, as far as was practicable. After strong re-
249
£.
s.
d.
Canada
354,721
12
9
Nova Scotia and New Brunswick
125,353
5
11
Newfoundland
9,921
7
2
Bermuda
28,269
13
10
Bahama Islands
7,904
18
0
Windward and Leeward Island and Colonies
346,108
9
0
Jamaica
115,691
9
0
Cape of Good Hope
177,043
13
0
Mauritius
57,274
13
1
Mediterranean
201,247
4
3
Gibraltar
140,092
8
4
Sierra Leone and Gambia
62,298
4
1
Heligoland
6,371
2
6
1,629,298
1
6
The revenue collected in these colonies amounted to
1,926,850
0
0
Making the total expense
£.3,556,148
1
6
Revenue.
Expenditure.
Ceylon, 1817
£.378,812
£.450,816
Mauritius, 1817
164,441
251,186
Malta and Gozo, 1818.
108,336
105,761
Cape of Good Hope, 1819
116,115
119,087
250
251
l.
l.
l.
252
Mr. Wilmot
rose, not with any intention of opposing the motion, but for the purpose of giving an explanation on one or two points. Government had pledged themselves in the course of last session, to give the fullest information with reference to the expense of the colonies. That information was to be obtained through the agency of commissioners, whose reports would be laid before the House. It was intended by his majesty's government to lay on the table, with reference to the year 1824, an account of the revenue raised in those colonies, and the manner in which it had been appropriated. With respect to the sum expended by Great Britain in aid of the colonies, when the sum raised on the spot was not sufficient to meet the necessary charges, the hon. gentleman could see the amount in the estimates that were annually produced. He must, however, perceive, that it would be impossible to give him the information which he required, with respect to the exact portion of military force that it would be necessary to keep in each of the colonies every year. Government could not state the precise number of troops that would be requisite in every year. In fact, even if it could be ascertained, it would not be safe nor prudent to make the disclosure. Again, to say that every colony should be bound to answer for its military expenditure, and that a fixed number of troops should be maintained, would be to take out of the hands of government the discretion which it ought to possess, with respect to the disposal of the military force of the empire. There were many considerations, both of economy and policy, which forbad the adoption of such a principle. The subject could not be considered on such narrow grounds as those which had been stated by the hon.
253
Mr. Bright
said, it was, in his opinion, high time to take into consideration the state of the colonies, for the purpose of forming wise and wholesome constitutions for them, or, in default of so doing, to make application to the throne that such charters should be granted to them as were suited to their peculiar interests and habits. Canada had been for a long time in the same state as some of the colonies which had that night been mentioned, until, at length, hasty and inefficient charters were drawn up. This, he hoped, would be avoided with respect to the new colonies; and that, in legislating for them, due regard would be had to their immediate wants and their original habits. The hon. mover had complained, that the Dutch law still prevailed at the Cape of Good Hope, and he had expressed his regret, that the British constitution had not been extended to that colony. But, was the British constitution fit for every soil? Were its principles in unison with the long-established manners and customs of every people? Could the laws of one country be transplanted to another, to the advantage of a people who had been accustomed to a very different system? Certainly not. The best system of law was that which agreed best with the habits and manners of a people; and therefore it was impossible to transplant an entire code of laws from one part of the world to another, so as to produce a beneficial effect. In forming laws, attention should be paid to the circumstances, feelings, wants, and habits of a community; and it was by pursuing that plan alone, that the Cape of Good Hope, or any other colony, could be effectively governed. Some of the doctrines laid down by the hon. member were at variance with the sound maxims of our forefathers; and the broaching such doctrines in that House, if they were suffered to pass unnoticed, would produce the most mischievous
254
Mr. Maberly
could see no reason why the House should not have regular accounts of the income and expenditure of the colonies, in the same way as they had returns of every other part of the expenditure of the empire.
Mr. Wilmot
said, that so far as it was possible, regular returns should be laid before the House. It was distinctly imposed on governors of colonies, as a duty, to semi over such returns.
Mr. Hume
consented to withdraw his motion, with the understanding, that the information required should be granted as soon as possible.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, February 26, 1823.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS—SURREY
Mr. Denison
, in presenting the petition of the freeholders of Surrey, in county meeting assembled, commented upon the great respectability of the meeting, and the degree of unanimity which had marked its proceedings. The petition complained of the weight of taxes and of it tithes; of the expensiveness of government in all its departments—its diplomacies, its armies, its colonies, and in the collection of its revenue. It recommended reform in parliament, general retrenchment, repeal of the malt-tax, and of the house and window-tax—a measure which he was glad to see already partly carried into execution. There was one point, however, which the petition did not touch, but upon which it might with great propriety have dwelt, and that was upon the tampering with the currency of the country, first in 1797, and again in 1819. He was of opinion, that those changes of currency had produced more mischief to the
255
Captain Maberly
, as one of the small minority who had held up their hands against the petition, wished to say a few words. He was very far from thinking any general adjustment of contracts necessary. The instances of real suffering from the change of the currency were comparatively few; while the mischief of any interference with contracts would be incalculable.
Mr. Ricardo
would not have risen upon this occasion, if the hon. gentleman had not declared, that he wished some amicable arrangement could be made by which that part of the country which was now profiting on account of the loss of the others, might be made to bear its share in the burdens. He complained that the words which had been used at that and at other public meetings, had been vague as to the advantage of the public creditor. For his, part, he was at a loss to see what advantage the fundholder had gained. The argument appeared to him to be made use of rather upon the principle, that by giving your adversary's argument a bad name, you give your own a good one. Upon such grounds it was contended that the stockholder had met with nothing but gain; but those who had attended to the question, were of a different opinion. If only that which the fundholder was gaining now upon the sums which he had lent after the depreciation, was to be taken into the account, then there would no doubt be a balance in his favour; but, this view of the question would be most unfair. It would be stating the profit on the one side, without the corresponding loss on the other. If both of these were to be taken into the account, it would be found that the stockholder had had no
256
l.
l.
l.
l.
257
l.
s.
258
Lord Folkestone
, referring to the question of his hon. friend, whether, if the standard had been increased even to the proportion of being doubled, the country would, under such circumstances, witness the phenomena of an increasing revenue and a thriving trade—contended, that there existed no similarity in the two cases. He should first beg leave to doubt one of the data of his hon. friend; namely, the existence of a thriving trade. When, a few nights past, one of the representatives for London, presented the petition of the city, he had laid considerable stress on the stagnation in trade that existed. Another hon. member, connected with commerce, the very night of the financial discussion, adverted particularly to the distresses of a very important branch of our commercial relations—the shipping interest. These facts were not easily reconcileable with a thriving trade. With respect to the suggestion he had made, in 1819, of increasing the standard to 4
l.
s.
259
Mr. Wodehouse
expressed his disinclination to prolong the discussion, but he could not allow the opportunity to pass, without submitting to the consideration of the House, and particularly to the hon. gentleman who disputed the effects of the alteration of the currency, the high and acknowledged authority of the late Mr. Henry Thornton, on that memorable discussion upon the report of the bullion committee, on the 6th of May, 1811:—To change the standard when the paper has been long depreciated, is only to establish and perpetuate a currency of that value to which we already are accustomed, and may also be made the means of precluding further depression. The very argument of justice, after a certain time, passes over to the side of deterioration. If we have been used to a depreciated paper for only two or three years, justice is on the side of returning to the antecedent standard; but if eight, ten, or even fifteen or twenty years, have passed since the paper fell, then it may be deemed unfair to restore the ancient value of the circulating medium; for bargains will have been made, and loans supplied, under an expectation of the continuance of the existing depreciation."
Mr. Sumner
observed, that the meeting
260
Mr. Grey Bennet
agreed, that the question of the currency, with reference to the existing agricultural distress, ought to be brought forward specifically in that House. His hon. friend, the member for Essex, would, before this, have submitted his motion on that important subject, if the delicate state of his health had not prevented him. He would not now go into that question; but he could not avoid expressing his astonishment, when he heard his hon. friend asserting, that he did not consider the distress which weighed heavily on the agriculturists, to have been, in any great degree, produced by the change in the currency. Was it possible, when the currency was raised from a depreciation of 40 or 50 per cent, and placed at par, that such a change could take place, without having a considerable effect on the property of the country? Transactions which had been carried on in one currency, were now to be paid in another—debts which had been contracted under a depreciated currency, were now to be paid in gold; and yet, to his utter astonishment, his hon. friend argued, that such a transition had produced no ill effect. He, however, was prepared to show, that it had operated a. depreciation of not less than 40 per cent. But, supposing it to be only 10 per cent, how could his hon. friend give his assent to a measure which imposed a tax of 10-per cent on every debtor; which added 10 per cent to the property of every creditor; which raised the value of every placeman's salary 10 per cent; which gave an addition of 10 per cent to that large class of persons who were creditors of the state, from the king on the throne to the lowest
261
l.
s.
s.
262
Mr. Peel
said, he did not rise to discuss the question of the currency, for he deprecated all incidental debate upon the subject, more especially as a notice of motion had been given, which would bring the whole question under the consideration of the House; but, if he remained altogether silent, he might be supposed to acquiesce in statements, the validity of which he could never admit. How was it possible to suppose that, after the long derangement which had taken place in the currency, its value could be restored by the bill of 1819, without partial pressure and inconvenience? It was no solid objection to this measure, that such pressure was proved to exist. It was a consequence that could not he avoided. Before 1819, as far as the fundholder was concerned, a great part of the debt was contracted in a depreciated currency; but it should not be forgotten, that there was a distinct enactment to the effect, that on the arrival of peace the currency should be restored. Different views of policy might be fairly entertained at different periods; but surely at all times, and at all periods, equity and justice were the same. What was just in 1811, was just in 1819, even though the pressure in the latter year were greater than in the former. What was the resolution proposed to the House in 1811, by Mr. Horner? why, that payment in cash should be renewed by the Bank, not within six months after the ratification of a definitive treaty of peace, but within two years from that present time. When it was found necessary to enact, that the payment of promissory notes in cash should be suspended, it was not in contemplation of those who passed the act, that any change should take place in the value of promissory notes; and that was what the House declared in its resolution of 1811. At the present period, then, would it be just, to make any deduction from what we were bound to pay the public creditor, on account of a change of value? Such was not the intention of parliament when it contemplated a return to cash payments on the event of peace. For himself, he maintained every opinion on the subject
263
Mr. Monck
said, that if, as was asserted, the old restictrion act committed a great injustice on the public creditor, it was no less true, that a great injustice was now inflicted on the public debtor. Mr. Mushett's tables, it should be observed, only went down to near the present period; but, while the injustice to the creditor only operated at the utmost for about twenty years, that to the debtor would, if persisted in now, affect him in perpetuity. Those who were opposed to his opinion, considered the question as only between the creditor and debtor; but there was another class distinct from both, whose interests were most seriously affected. He meant heirs at law, mortgagers, and others who made contracts under very different circumstances; and who, if the House did not interfere, must be stripped of their property, and consigned to absolute ruin. A very serious fallacy existed relative to the currency up to 1819, namely, that there was no difference between the price and the value of gold; but the fact was, that when the price was depreciated not more than 4 per cent, the value of the gold itself was depreciated 40 per cent. When the bill passed, the price was fixed at 3
l.
s.
d.
chronicon pretiosum
s.
d.
s.
d.
264
Mr. Ricardo
admitted, that the noble lord was correct, in stating that he (Mr. R.) had on one occasion computed the depreciation at 5 per cent, and that he now found it to be 10 per cent; still, he was not in error. His first computation referred to a payment in bullion; and it would have been correct if the Bank had acted precisely in the spirit of that bill but, instead of doing so, they had got together a large quantity of gold, which they coined into sovereigns, and then they came down to the House to procure an act, enabling them to get rid of those sovereigns. If the measure of which he approved had been acted on, the depreciation would have been but 5 per cent; because it would have been measured by the price of gold.
Lord Folkestone
said, he had supposed the hon. member to have been arguing with reference to Mr. Peel's bill; but now he discovered, that his argument rested on a measure which existed only in his own imagination.
Ordered to lie on the table.
CORN LAWS.]—
Mr. Whitmore
rose, pursuant to notice, to bring under the consideration of the House, the Laws relating to the trade in Corn. He would, in the outset, touch upon the objections which he understood were made to his introduction of the subject. In the first instance, it was objected, that the discussion could only tend, from the want of practical result, to increase the despondency already so extensively felt. He differed entirely from those who started the objection. Though there should be no practical result, yet he was convinced that a rational discussion would have a considerable effect in dispelling alarm, and when he felt that the law was the cause of the distress experienced, and the very root of the evil, he could not feel that he did his duty if he neglected to introduce the subject to the consideration of parliament. With reference to any objection as to the time of discussion, he would say, that if he had taken a right view of the question, no time could be unpropitious for its consideration; and he should think the present time well adapted to that discussion; for, in the considera-
265
266
267
268
269
"—Not far removed the date,
When commerce proudly flourish'd through the state:
At her command the palace learn'd to rise,
Again the long-fall'n columns sought the skies:
The canvas glow'd beyond e'en Nature warm;
The pregnant quarry teem'd with human form;
Till, more unsteady than the southern gale,
Commerce on other shores display'd her sail;
While nought remain'd of all that riches gave,
But towns unmann'd, and lords without a slave:
And late the nation found, with fruitless skill,
Its former strength was but plethoric ill."
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
Mr. Curwen
rose to condemn the unwise course which the hon. member had taken, in the introduction of this question. He should not feel that he was doing justice to the memory of a late statesman (the marquis of Londonderry), if he did not declare his conviction, that in the latter period of his life, that individual had done all that he could do, for the protection of agriculture. He (Mr. C.) did not wish for great protecting prices, but he wished to see every acre of land that could be made available, under cultivation. They had been told that remission of taxation would effect no relief to the agricultural interest; but, from the
270
l.
l.
271
272
s.
d.
d.
l.
s.
273
Mr. Bolett
, of Wilts, said, he concurred in thinking that it would be better for the country to continue the law in question, as it at present existed, than to disturb it, by acceding to the motion. Part of the principle of that law was to give a bounty on the exportation, as well as to lay a duty on the importation, of corn. In this, also, he concurred; and, indeed, that great authority, Adam Smith, had laid it down as a maxim, "that any country which depended on another for any portion of its food, or actual subsistence, could be said to have no other than an ephemeral existence;" and Mr. Malthus had advanced the same position, in almost the same words. He would now take the liberty of submitting the result of some very careful calculations which he had made in relation to the subject before the House. In the first place, there had been a great cessation, or reduction of cultivation, since 1815. The income on taxes raised on the land in that year was fixed at 43,000,000
l.
l.
274
s.
s.
s.
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
275
s.
s.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Wodehouse
said, he gave the hon. member for Bridgenorth credit for the motives which had induced him to bring
276
s.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
l.
s.
l.
s.
l.
s.
d.
277
s.
s.
s.
Mr. Huskisson
said, that if he had not been so pointedly alluded to, he should not have interposed to prevent the conclusion of the debate, which the House seemed anxious to arrive at. He had Dever complained of any remarks upon the report of 1821, or of any remarks upon what he himself had said; but he had deemed it improper, and contrary to usage, that a report which should be deemed the opinion of the committee collectively, had been ascribed to himself, an individual member of it. Many alterations had, indeed, been made in that report; not only not by him, but in opposition to his opinion. He would not attempt to follow the very desultory discussion which had taken place since the speech of the hon. mover. It was impossible for him to enter into all the details respecting the different modes of farming in use, the relative merits and demerits of land, and the remission of taxation. He would, however, express his satisfaction at the fact, that the country could, consistently with public credit, make a considerable remission of the burdens which weighed upon the people. The hon. member for Cumberland, when he attempted to show the relief that would be afforded to agriculture by the remission of two particular taxes, was not borne out by his own calculations. The hon. mem-
278
s.
d.
s.
l.
279
s.
280
Mr. Ricardo
said, that the right hon. gentleman, in all the arguments which he had brought forward for postponing the consideration of the corn laws, had in reality given a reason for proceeding at once to amend them. What was the danger which his hon. friend, who brought forward the present motion, apprehended? It was the danger of those very high prices, to the recurrence of which the right hon. gentleman looked forward, as the conjuncture when the corn laws might be amended. He apprehended the danger of capital being again drawn, by the temptation of high prices, to the land (and the right hon. gentleman agreed that the danger existed)—that there would again be a succession of low prices, and another loss of capital. This evil it was the object of the present proposition to prevent; yet the right hon. gentleman would wait till the evil came upon them, before he would provide the remedy. As to the motion of his hon. friend, he would not oppose it; because he should be glad
281
s.
s.
s.
s.
282
s.
Mr. Attwood
remarked on some of the arguments which had been adduced by the hon. member for Bridgenorth, and by the right honourable President of the Board of Trade. The former, he said, had rested his motion mainly on the erroneous and frequently refuted opinion, that the great fluctuations in the prices of grain, which had taken place within the last thirty years, and which had produced so much evil, had been principally occasioned by the state of the corn laws, and by the difficulties and expense which had, during the war, been opposed to the importation of foreign grain. His views on this head he had explained, by stating a suppositious case, referring to another country, and by asking what the state of
283
s.
s.
284
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
285
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
286
287
s.
s.
s.
Mr. Monck
declared his intention of voting in favour of the present motion, because he agreed with almost all the principles which the hon. mover had stated to the House. The only mode of relief which he thought feasible was to diminish the expense of growing corn; and that could only be done by diminishing the pressure of taxation.
Colonel Wood
was of opinion, that nothing could unsettle the mind of the country more than the revival of a measure like the present, after the repeated discussion which the subject had undergone last session.
Mr. Hume
declared his intention of supporting the motion, and of taking the sense of the House upon it.
Sir T. Lethbridge
hoped the House would not adopt the proposition then before it, as it did not go far enough. He called upon ministers to give the agriculturists some support on this question, which they could not give more effectually than by putting a decided negative on the present motion.
Mr. Whitmore
said, that after the declaration he had made, he would not press his motion upon the House; but if any hon. member should insist upon a division, he should certainly give his vote, as if he had taken the division upon it himself.
Mr. S. Wortley
thought that the proposed bill did not go far enough. He was convinced that there was no safety for the agriculturist, unless the ports were kept constantly open, with a regulating duty. Though he would not pledge himself to support all the details of the present bill when introduced, he would
288
Mr. Leycester
said, he was not for high, but for low prices; but, before a reduction of prices could be made, the cost of production must be diminished; and that diminution could not take place, without a great diminution of taxation.
The House then divided:—Ayes, 25; Noes, 78. Majority against the motion, 53.
List of the Minority.
Baillie, J.
Knatchbull, sir E.
Cranborne, lord
Monck, J. B.
Chamberlayne, W.
Ricardo, D.
Craddock, col.
Rumbold, C. E.
Evans, W.
Rice, T. S.
Farrand, R.
Wood, col.
Fergusson, sir R.
Wemyss, captain
Fitzgerald, M.
Wilberforce, W.
Gladstone, J.
Wood, alderman
Handley, H.
Wortley, S.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Wyvill, M.
James, W.
TELLERS.
Jones, J.
Whitmore, W.
Jervoise, G. P.
Hume, J.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, February 27, 1823.
RAMSGATE HARBOUR.]—
Mr. Manning,
on moving for a Return of the Balances in the hands of the Trustees of Ramsgate Harbour, said, he wished to contradict a very unfounded report which had gone forth, that an hon. baronet (sir W. Curtis) held balances to a large amount in his hands. It was not true that his hon. friend had acted as treasurer; and he was so far from ever having held any of the money of the trustees in his hands, that he had himself advanced a considerable sum towards the expenses of the harbour.
Mr. Wallace
bore testimony to the honourable character of the worthy baronet in question, and expressed his conviction, that there was not the slightest ground for any imputation upon it.
The motion was agreed to.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS—PETITION
Mr. Price
presented a petition, signed by 700 landowners of the county of Hereford, complaining of Agricultural Distress, and praying for relief. This petition was, he said, no other than the Norfolk petition, transplanted to the county of Hereford. He regretted that such doctrines as had been advanced in that petition had re-
289
Lord Folkestone
considered it rather rash conduct in a county member, to pronounce such an unqualified judgment on the opinions of his constituents. The petition was signed by 700 respectable freeholders of the county. The very fact of their having affixed their signatures to the petition was a striking proof of their having deliberated on its allegations. The petition of the county of Norfolk and the present petition also had been much censured; but, as yet, he had not heard a single word in refutation of the arguments contained in either.
Ordered to lie on the table.
MR. BOWRING'S IMPRISONMENT IN
Lord A. Hamilton
rose to call the attention of the House to a case of extreme injustice and oppression which had been committed on the person of an Englishman in a foreign land. When the House should learn, that the person upon whom this wrong had been done was under the protection of this government, and that he was duly furnished with passports, he was sure that gentlemen would at least listen with interest to the statement he had to make. He did not stand there to arraign the government of any country; but he would say, that under the sanction of that of France, injustice, oppression, and tyranny had been exercised upon a British subject. Although he was prepared to admit, that all which had been done by the government of England had been rightly done, still he could not agree, that they might not have done something more. He would state what Mr. Bowring had suffered, the means he had taken to obtain redress, what redress he had Obtained, and he thought the
290
au secret,
291
292
293
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, whatever might be the expediency of the motion of the noble lord, he was sure that he had neither the right nor the disposition to impute to him, that he brought it forward with any improper view, or that he had urged it with any improper feeling. For himself, looking to the way in which the noble lord had been pleased to allude to Trim, with reference to the part he had taken in this transaction, he had nothing to complain of; neither did he complain, that the question was now agitated; for he willingly admitted, that the noble lord might be of opinion, that there was something in it worthy of the serious consideration of parliament; but he meant to oppose the production of these papers, on the plain parliamentary principle, that the production of papers, for no necessary purpose, or with no definite view, was always inexpedient; that those who moved for documents were bound to show the reason for their production; and not that those who opposed the proposition, were called on to adduce arguments for their non-production. In following the noble lord, he would endeavour to put out of his way, any thing like individual allusion, by stating this case on the general principle, on which all such individual cases must stand. He presumed, that it was one of the first and most recognized principles of the law of nations, that an individual who entered voluntarily into a foreign country, at the same time entered into a temporary and qualified allegiance to the laws of that country; that he confined himself to their observance; that he submitted to their operation; and that,
294
295
malum in se,
malum prohibitum
296
297
Sir R. Wilson
said, he believed the meanest native of any other country would not have been treated as Mr. Bowring, an English merchant, a gentleman of most amiable manners and excellent attainments, had been treated by the French
298
lettres de cuchet;
au secret?
299
Mr. Hutchinson
said, he should ever uphold the principle, that our government was bound to afford aid and protection to British subjects in foreign countries. In him it would be particularly ungrateful to say any thing against France or her government: from the one he had received the utmost hospitality, by the other he had been treated with the greatest kindness; and it was in that nation that he had formed some of the most agreeable and binding connexions which he had the happiness to boast of. Thus situated, he should be extremely sorry indeed if he could either be guilty himself, or support others who were guilty of plotting and intriguing against the government of a country, for which he had so sincere a respect and love: but the case before the House was that of an innocent and most persecuted individual, and he differed from the right hon. secretary in the inference which he would seem to draw, from the fact, that that individual had been tried by the French government for the minor offence only. Mr. Bowring had been persecuted by them. And why? Apparently, because he lived with some of the most enlightened, intelligent, and patriotic men in France. Really he was tempted to think that Mr. Bowring had been arrested by the government in question, in the hope that something would be discovered among his papers that might tend to implicate, not so much Mr. Bowring himself, as some of those distinguished characters with whom he had been acquainted. With respect to his own papers, all that was found in them was a mere private opinion, intended to be privately communicated, upon the character of the king of France. Why, then, the right hon. gentleman seemed to infer, that Mr. Bowring had been carried and confined
au secret,
300
au secret,
au secret,
lettres de cachel
301
Mr. Canning
said, he should be exceedingly sorry to be misunderstood. He had never stated that Mr. Bowring had been relieved from the larger offence by the mercy of the French government. He could never have stated that; because it would have been to imply what he most cautiously guarded against, namely, that Mr. Bowring was guilty of that offence. Now, he was bound, to that gentleman in common with all other accused persons, to believe him innocent until he was proved to be guilty, and certainly he was by no means disposed to adhere to that principle less in the case of Mr. Bowring than in any other one.
Lord A. Hamilton
observed, that when he found it admitted, that an Englishman had been wrongfully arrested, imprisoned, and persecuted, and had been denied justice or redress, he could feel no regret at having brought his case under the notice of that House.
The question was put, and negatived.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, February 28, 1823.
BEER AND ALE BILL.—
Mr. Brougham,
in moving for leave to bring in a bill to regulate the retail trade in Beer, observed, that it was exactly the same bill as that which had passed through several stages in the last session. As soon as the bill should be brought in, it was his intention to move, that it be postponed until after the Easter recess, not merely on account of his being under the necessity of leaving town, but because the chancellor of the exchequer had intimated his intention of proposing a measure, tending towards the accomplishment of the same objects. He should have great satisfaction in seeing his measure taken up by so powerful a foster-parent; and though he could scarcely hope, that the right hon. gentleman's measure would go to the full extent of his own, yet, to whatever extent it might go, he was persuaded it would effect a great improvement in the present state of the law; that it would relieve the agriculturists, especially those who had light land, which was better adapted to the cultivation of barley than of wheat; and that it would tend greatly to increase the comfort, and advance the morals of the industrious classes of the community.
302
Mr. Alderman Wood
regretted that the measure of the learned gentleman differed from that which he had proposed last year.
Mr. Brougham
said, the bill was precisely the same as that which he had proposed last year. He was not bound to find memory for the worthy alderman; all he was bound to do, in introducing the bill, was to make what appeared to him to be sound and apposite observations, which he was sorry the worthy alderman had so entirely failed to understand.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, the reduction of taxation which had already been proposed, would be of considerable advantage to the poorer classes. The measure which he had to bring forward would be, he trusted, advantageous to all classes of the community, and to none more than to that class, whose interest was supposed to be most affected by this article. His object was, in short, that the best beer should be obtained at the lowest price.
REDUCTION OF TAXATION.—
Mr. Moberly
rose to make the motion of which be had given notice. The subject, he said, was of the greatest importance to the country. The table of the House was literally groaning under the weight of the petitions complaining of excessive taxation, and praying for relief. If the measure which he had to propose were acted upon, it would relieve the people to the extent of seven millions of taxes, and, at the same time, enable every thing to be carried on in the way most conducive to the honour of the country. It would
303
l.
l.
s.,
l.
l.
s.
l.
304
l.
l.
305
l.
306
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
307
1. "That by the resolutions voted by this House in the year 1819, it was deemed expedient, that an efficient sinking fund should be created, to the amount of five millions.
2. "That at the time in question, it was agreed unanimously, that the only sinking fund which can be efficient, is that which is produced by a surplus of income over expenditure.
3."That, as far as can be collected from the papers laid upon the table of the House, there actually exists a sum of about live millions applicable to the reduction of the national debt.
4. "That, in addition to these five millions, applicable to the reduction of the debt, there is, at the disposition of parliament, arising from the increased productiveness of several branches of revenue, and from the various plans of reform and economy in the administration of the country, proposed to be carried into execution this year, a sum of about 2,200,000
l.
5. "That it appears, therefore, that a total sum of 7,200,000
l.,
6. "That, although it was determined that the capital stock purchased by the commissioners for the redemption of the national debt, with this efficient sinking fund, should be transferred to their account, it was nevertheless understood, that the interest payable upon stock so purchased, should either determine at the time of purchase, or be paid over and become part of the consolidated fund.
7. "That, taking 80
l.
l.
l.
308
8. "That in the year 1798, for the support of public credit, there was passed an act for the redemption and purchase of land tax; which act, from the exorbitant conditions attached to such redemption and purchase, has, in a great measure, failed in effecting the destined object.
9. "That notwithstanding the obstacles thus created, such has been the anxiety of the public to redeem their land, and purchase landed securities, that the sum redeemed and purchased amounts to 700,000
l.,
10. "That, if so large a proportion of the land tax has been redeemed and purchased, at a sacrifice, in the first instance, of 10
l.,
l.
l.,
11. "That it appears, that 1,239,701
l.
l.,
12. "That it appears that this method of reducing debt by no means differs in its substance from that which was adopted by the House in the resolutions of 1819, the essential attributes of both plans being the maintenance of public credit, by the diminution of the quantity of debt.
13. "That, as the mode of redeeming the national debt, by redemption and purchase of land tax, injures no class of proprietors, and will absorb a quantity of debt, nearly equal to that which would be redeemed by an efficient sinking fund of five millions, annually laid out during seven years, it is expedient to substitute it for the sinking fund, adopted in the resolutions of the House in 1819.
14. "That by this substitution there may be remitted to the people, in alleviation of their distress, seven millions of taxes."
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
commenced with stating, that from the line of argument taken by the hon. member, it would not be necessary for him to trespass at any considerable length on the attention of the committee. The hon. member had himself conceded the very points on which he should feel it his duty to oppose the hon. member's proposition.
309
l.
310
l.
l.
311
312
313
Captain Maberly
said, he felt some difficulty in answering the objections which had been urged against the plan of his lion, relative, from the very nature of those objections. He had come down to the House expecting to hear something like argument against the practicability of carrying the measure into execution. The right hon. gentleman, however, had done little more than urge the danger of large monied companies dabbling in the land tax. Why, this was the very object Mr. Pitt had in view: his first idea was to make the land tax perpetual; he then allowed individuals, not proprietors, to purchase up the land tax, by paying 20 per cent by transferring from the funds, and 10 per cent if he were the proprietor. In this case the funded proprietor paid 20 per cent, for the privilege of converting his property from the funds into land. To this his hon. relative objected; and he coincided in the objection. He was desirous of placing the fund holder and the landholder on terms equally secure. He did not see how the argument of the chancellor of the exchequer could apply, that the annihilation of the debt would be the annihilation of income. If, at the end of 38 years the land tax would be redeemed by appropriating the sum of 1,200,000
l.
l.
314
Mr. Ricardo
thought that the plan which had been proposed by the hon. mover, could by no means be considered as a desirable substitute for the sinking fund. At the same time, it might possess those merits which should induce the House to adopt it. In the manner in which his hon. friend had proposed that plan, he certainly could not acquiesce; for he thought it would fail to accomplish the object which he conceived to be so desirable. It was, indeed, most desirable, that we should diminish the amount of our debt; and to effect that diminution, he did believe it might be available; but, in such case, it must be adopted in a different way from that in which the hon. gentleman had stated it. Its object was to purchase up a certain quantity of the land tax, by the transfer of a certain quantity of stock; and then it went on to propose, that other parties might purchase the tax, in case the proprietor of the land should not choose to do so. If this had
315
l.
316
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
l.
317
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
318
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.;
l.
l.
l.;
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
319
l.,
l.
l.;
l.;
l.,
l.
l.
Mr. Baring,
adverting to what had fallen from an hon. gentleman (Mr. W Maberly) observed, that if that hon. gentleman had not been quite so young, or had passed more years in observation upon the real state of the finances of the country, he would not have lent himself to the support of what appeared to him the lightest bubble that was ever blown
320
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
321
322
l.
323
324
Mr. Tierney
commenced by observing, that he could assure his hon. friend who had just sat down, that he did not view the subject lightly, but attached as much weight and consideration to it as his hon. friend could possibly do. But, what was the real question? It was nothing else than whether five millions were to be taken from the taxes of the country or not. He believed such arguments had been offered to the House, as at least would incline it to consider whether a sinking fund of five millions ought to be supported, or a reduction of taxes to that amount. He could say, without fear of contradiction, that no one had been a more consistent friend to the plan of Mr. Pitt's sinking fund than himself; but he had often warned the House of the lavish expense of that minister, under which no plan of a sinking fund could be carried into beneficial effect. But, though he supported the original principle of the sinking fund, he did not think that the present situation of the country was such as to bear a sinking fund of five millions. That situation was such, that it required at least a remission of taxes to that amount. He had outlived the real sinking fund, for of that established by Mr. Pitt, not a trace was now remaining. It was truly said by his hon. friend behind him, that repeated invasions had been made on the original sinking fund. He (Mr. T.) had witnessed those invasions, and had opposed every one of them. But now the mask was: thrown aside; for while the law declared that there was a sinking fund of 17 millions, the House was now called upon to declare, that there should be a sinking fund of but five millions. It. was said on the opposite side, that the public credit depended on a sinking fund of five mil-
325
326
327
328
l.
l.
l.
l.
329
l.,
l.
hocus pocus!
330
Mr. Huskisson
apologized to the House for addressing it, after the able manner in which the subject had been discussed by his right hon. friend, the chancellor of the exchequer, and by the hon. member for Taunton. The House would at once perceive, that the present was an anticipation of the discussion that would take place more regularly on Monday next, when his right hon. friend had signified his intention of bringing the whole question respecting that most important part of our financial system, the sinking fund, under their consideration. He would not complain of it; but the right hon. gentleman who had just spoken had introduced the subject rather prematurely, in his observations on the speech of the hon. member for Taunton—a speech which he had heard with the greatest satisfaction, exhibiting, as it did, the most statesmanlike views with regard to the importance of retaining a surplus revenue, and employing it towards the liquidation of the debt. Coming, as that opinion did, from an individual of the hon. gentleman's knowledge and experience, it would have more weight in the country, and tend more to the maintenance of the public credit, than if it had proceeded from almost any other person in the House. He owned that he was much surprised at what had just fallen from the right hon. gentleman on the subject of the sinking fund. The right hon. gentleman's observations were as applicable against the creation of a sinking fund at any period, as they were against the maintenance of such a fund at present. When he recollected how strenuous a supporter the right hon. gentleman had been of the establishment of the sinking fund in 1786, he was at a loss to understand why he had so completely changed his opinion on the subject. The right hon. gentleman had urged, as one
331
l.
l.
l.
332
l.
l.
333
l.
l.
334
335
Mr. Calcraft
considered the present discussion to be important, not merely because it related to the plan of his hon. friend, but because it also involved the application of the surplus of our revenue, and the arrangement of the sinking fund. The right hon. gentleman who had just sat down, in alluding to his hon. friend's plan regarding the sinking fund, had said, that the objection which had been made to the sinking fund, as at present conducted, might have been made against its first establishment in 1786. Now, the Charge which the right hon. gentleman had made against his hon. friend did not apply at all. The internal state of the country differed so much from what it was in 1786, that no parity of circumstances could be found between them. For his own part, he did not consider the difference of opinion between the two sides of the House to be so great as the right hon. gentleman had represented it. The chancellor of the exchequer had told the country, that it was to have a remission of taxation to the amount of 2,000,000
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
336
l.
Mr. Maberly
shortly replied. He contended, that the plan which he had introduced to the House, did not deserve the name of bubble, which had been applied to it. Indeed, if it was a bubble, it was a bubble which not only Mr. Pitt had supported, but also the right hon. gentleman who had for so many years sat upon the opposite benches. The plan too, whether it was a good or bad one, was not his plan; but had for many years been sanctioned by an act of parliament. Kicked and cuffed about, as it had been that evening, he must still maintain, that no argument had been offered to the House, to show that it might not honestly and fairly remit seven millions of taxes, and by selling the land tax, get a substitute for the five millions which it had determined to apply annually to the maintenance of the sinking fund. With this conviction on his mind, he was determined to press his resolutions upon the House.
The previous question being put upon the first resolution, the House divided: Ayes, 72; Noes, 157. Majority against Mr. Maberly's resolution, 85. The previous question was then put on the rest of the resolutions, and negatived without a division.
337
List of the Minority.
Allen, J. H.
Monck, J. B.
Barrett, S. M.
Mundy, F.
Benett, J.
Newman, R. W.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Normanby, visc.
Benyon, B.
Ord, Wm.
Bernal, R.
Palmer, C.
Calcraft, J. H.
Palmer, C. F.
Calcraft, J.
Pelham, J. C.
Carter, J.
Price, Robt.
Clifton, lord
Poyntz, W. S.
Curwen, J. C.
Pryse, P.
Cradock, S.
Ramsden, J. C.
Davenport, D.
Ricardo, D.
De Crespigny, sir W.
Robarts, A. W.
Denison, W. J.
Robarts, G. J.
Denman, T.
Rowley, sir W.
Dickinson, W.
Scarlett, J.
Dundas, C.
Sefton, earl of
Ebrington, visc.
Shelly, sir J.
Ellice, E.
Smith, W.
Farquharson, A.
Talbot, R. W.
Farrand, R.
Tierney, right hon. G.
Ferguson, sir R. C.
Tynte, C. K.
Grattan, J.
Webbe, E.
Griffiths, J. W.
Whitbread, S. C.
Guise, sir B. W.
White, col.
Hamilton, lord A.
Williams, T. P.
Heron, sir R.
Wilson, sir R.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Winnington, sir T.
Honywood, W. P.
Wood, M.
Hornby, E.
Wyvill, M.
James, W.
Johnstone, W. A.
TELLERS.
Legh-Keck, G. A
Maberly, J.
Lamb, hon. G.
Hume, J.
Lennard, T. B.
Lethbridge, sir T.
PAIRED OFF.
Leycester, R.
Birch, J.
Lushington, S.
Brougham, H.
Leader, W.
Creevey, T.
Maberly, W. L.
Duncannon, visc.
Macdonald, James
Robinson, sir G.
Marjoribanks, S.
Wilkins, W.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, March 3, 1823.
EAST INDIA SUGAR.]—
Mr. Whitmore
presented the following Petition from the Merchants, Ship-owners, and others, concerned in the Trade to the East Indies:
338
s.
339
340
Ordered to lie on the table.
NATIONAL DEBT REDUCTION ACTS—
The House having resolved itself into a Committee on the Acts for the Reduction of the National Debt,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
rose. He said, that the object he had at present in view, was to propose to them a series of resolutions, for the purpose, in the first place, of carrying into effect the recommendation of a committee of last year, which had considered the state of the public accounts. He was on this occasion inclined to flatter himself, that his resolutions were of a description not likely to be opposed. It was constantly admitted in the abstract, when the question was incidently discussed, that it was right, in a time of peace, to effect a reduction of the public debt, by applying to that purpose, whatever surplus existed of revenue over the current expenditure; but still it was often thought, that the attempt was useless, because the great variety of circumstances arising out of the change of things in the country, had a constant tendency to render that surplus of revenue more applicable to other urgent exigencies at the time—indeed, to make its application to the reduction, otherwise advisable, impracticable, and often tending to a destruction of that surplus itself. This constant fluctuation of circumstances, and wavering of opinions respecting them, was not, in his judgment, a sufficient reason for abstaining from fixing upon a principle for the reduction of the debt. The object was too important, to be laid aside, merely because difficulties in its execution had arisen, or might again exist. It was no
341
342
343
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
344
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
345
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
346
l.
1."That the payment of all sums of money which now are charged upon and issuable out of the consolidated fund of the united kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, to the commissioners for the reduction of the national debt, shall upon and after the 5th of April 1823, cease and determine.
2. "That all capital stock (save and except the capital stock arising from donations and bequests towards reducing the national debt), and all annuities for terms of years, which, on the 5th of April, 1823, shall stand in the names of the commissioners for the reduction of the national debt, in the books of the governor and company of the Bank of England, or of the South Sea company, or of the Bank of Ireland, either on account of the sinking fund, or for the purchase of life annuities, shall, from and after the 5th of April 1823, be cancelled in the books of the said Banks, and South Sea company respectively; and the interest or dividends, which would have been due and payable on the said capital stock or annuities upon and after the said 5th of April, shall cease to be issued from, or charged upon the said consolidated fund.
3. "That upon the 5th of April 1823, or as soon after as the same can be prepared, an account shall be laid before
347
l.
4. "That it is expedient that so much of two acts of the 53rd and 56th years of his late majesty, relating to the redemption of the national debt, as require that whenever an amount of capital funded debt of Great Britain and Ireland respectively should have been transferred to the said commissioners, as should be equal to the whole capital, and which should have produced an interest or yearly dividend equal in amount to the whole annual charge in perpetual annuities of each loan contracted since 1786, that a certificate and declaration thereof should be made by the said commissioners, and the amount of the public debt to which such certificate and declaration should relate, should from time to time be deemed to be wholly satisfied and discharged, and an equal amount of capital stock, standing in the names of the said commissioners, should be considered to be redeemed, and should from time to time be cancelled, should be repealed.
5. "That no capital stock, or annuities for terms of years, which, after the 5th of April 1823, shall be placed in the names of the said commissioners, in the books of the Bank of England, or of the South Sea company, or of the Bank of Ireland, shall be cancelled (save and except the stock placed in their names for the redemption of the land tax), until the interest of the debt redeemed by the said commissioners, by the application of the said sum of 5,000,000
l.,
348
6. "That a new and separate account shall be raised and kept in the books of the governor and company of the Bank of England, of the sums already given by way of donation or bequest towards reducing the national debt, and of all sums which shall hereafter be given or bequeathed for the like purpose, and the interest or dividends which shall accrue on all stock arising there from shall be applied in the purchase of public annuities, composing the national debt, for the purpose of fulfilling the directions of the person or persons giving or bequeathing the same, and to no other purpose whatever.
7. "That the annual expense of the establishment in Great Britain for the reduction of the national debt shall be charged upon the said consolidated fund.
8. "That the expenses of the establishments necessary for carrying into execution an act of the 48th year of his late majesty, for enabling the commissioners of the national debt to grant life annuities, and of two acts of the 39th and 54th years of his said majesty, for the redemption of the land tax, shall be charged upon the said consolidated fund.
9. "That it is expedient that the several acts for the reduction of the national debt, should be altered and amended."
Mr. Leycester
remonstrated against that callous feeling which could allow the House to listen patiently to such calculations as those which the right hon. gentleman had just submitted to them, instead of turning their attention to the best means of affording relief to the distresses of the country. The condition of the treasury was a secondary consideration in the present crisis. The purse of the people was the best treasury of the state. With respect to the sinking fund, even if it
349
Mr. Robertson
entreated the attention of the House to a few statements, which might suffice to show the improvident manner in which the finances of the country had been administered, and the mischievous effects which had resulted, in consequence of the original institution of the sinking fund. Seventy years ago, the government borrowed money, at precisely 3
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
350
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
351
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.
352
Mr. Hume
said, he had heard the statement which had been made by the chancellor of the exchequer, with considerable surprise, because it was in contradiction to documents which had been laid on the table of the House. He therefore hoped that the right hon. gentleman would, as early as possible, put the House in possession of a printed statement, which might be compared with other documents. It was impossible the House could come to a just conclusion with respect to the operations of the sinking fund, without referring to all the accounts which had been laid before parliament; and there were four or five different sets of those accounts, all differing from each other, as he should be able to prove, if the chancellor of the exchequer would consent to go into a committee upon the resolutions which he (Mr. Hume) submitted to the House last year, and which he intended again to propose. The chancellor of the exchequer was wrong in the calculation which he had made of the amount of debt redeemed by the operation of the sinking fund, from 1816 to the present time. The diminution of the debt, which the right hon. gentleman considered to be the result of the operation of the sinking
353
Income.
Expenditure.
Year 1817
£.57,650,589
£.58,544,049
1818
59,667,941
57,872,428
1819
58,680,252
57,392,544
1820
59,769,680
57,476,755
1821
60,686,076
57,639,893
Total
296,454,538
288,925,669
l.
l.
l.
l.
In 1817
£.31,266,601
1818
31,551,751
1819
30,792,025
1820
31,252,612
1821
31,966,078
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
354
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
355
l.
l.,
l.
356
l.
l.
l.
l.
357
l.
Mr. Baring
said, he agreed with the hon. member who had just sat down in many of his general observations, but he could not concur in the conclusions which he had drawn from some of them. He could not concur in the opinion, that when we continued to pay part of our debt by a sinking fund, we were going back. He would agree fully, that during the war, our sinking fund was kept up at a loss to the country; but how would this reasoning apply to a state of peace? But even in time of war, there were many who thought, and not without some appearance of reason, that public credit was better supported by a sinking fund, than it could be without it—who imagined, that it would be better maintained by borrowing 35 millions, leaving 5 as a sinking fund to pay the whole, than it would be by borrowing only 30 millions without having a sinking fund at all. He only mentioned this to show that the case was not so clear on the other side as the hon. member had represented it to be He (Mr. B.) admitted, that the sinking fund during the war was carried on at a loss; but not to the extent which the hon. member had described. He also concurred with the hon. member in thinking, that the system of borrowing with one hand to pay with another, was a had one; because, if he sold annuities or bills to buy other security, he not only did that, but he did it at a risk of loss; for, in creating a new kind of article, he must know that it was necessary to give an
358
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
359
360
361
Mr. T. Wilson
observed, that after the very able manner in which the hon. member had proved the utility of a sinking fund, he would not trouble the House with any remarks on that subject. It was a most absurd position to assert, that we ought not to endeavour to pay off in peace, the debt we had contracted in war. How, in the name of God, could we do otherwise? Were we to set the example of breaking faith with the public creditor, when every country in Europe, at the close of the war, had taken steps to secure the payment of their debts. Were we less able, or were we to be less honest, than they. An hon. member said, that we
362
l.
l.
Mr. D. Gilbert
said, that when the sinking fund was invaded by a former chancellor of the exchequer, he had resisted the invasion of it with the same arguments which the hon. member for Portarlington had recently employed. Though the House did not then listen to them, with the attention which it had lately bestowed on the subject, still he had reminded it, that the sinking fund ought not to be attacked at all; because, if it was beneficial in its effects in time of war, it was likely to be still more so in time of peace. He was happy to hear from the present chancellor of the exchequer that the country was to have an efficient sinking fund of 5,000,000
l.
Mr. Grey Bennet
said, he must oppose the continuance of any thing like a sinking fund in the present circumstances of the country. He was surprised to hear the hon. member assert, that a remission of taxation would afford the people no relief; and that to maintain the contrary doctrine was to encourage a delusion. Why, then, had the chancellor of the exchequer proposed to remit two million of taxes on a former evening? And why had the House hailed that proposition with so much rapture? Was it because the House considered it a delusion, or because it considered it a measure likely to produce beneficial consequences? He believed there were many persons who thought it was a delusion on the part of the right hon. gentleman, to say that he could not repeal a larger amount of taxes than that which he had promised to repeal; but he knew of nobody, except
363
364
Mr. John Smith
felt compelled to express his dissent from the doctrines of his hon. friend, who had spoken of public credit in terms of such derision. He believed the committee were perfectly clear in their ideas regarding public credit if they were not so, he would refer them to the excellent description which the hon. member for Taunton had given them of its effects on a former evening. The hon. member had informed the House, that there was a period during the war in which the government was obliged, from a want of public credit, to incur a heavy expense, which, under a better system, it might have avoided. If such was the case, was it not the bounden duty of the committee to support public credit, seeing that every thing which contributed to it tended to produce economy in the government? Admitting as he did the distress of the agricultural interest, he must still contend, that it was necessary to support the sinking fund. The agricultural interest, he maintained, would be the earliest sufferers, if there was any failure in public credit. What would be the consequence, if we, who had been the parents of the sinking fund system, should be the first to destroy, it?
365
Mr. Hume
was sorry that the system of sinking funds had ever been adopted in this country; and felt sure, that every country which followed our example, would, ere long, have the same reasons for repentance. From the facility of borrowing came a profusion of expenditure, and a total neglect of any thing like economy. Had it not been for the facility with which the government had obtained loans, whenever it wanted them, we should never have had such a wasteful expenditure of our resources.
Mr. Baring
was convinced, that the evils which had lately befallen one of the leading interests of the country were mainly attributable to the change in the currency. When he had proposed silver as a proper standard, he had done so, because he conceived it to be the best and most practicable standard to which the country could recur. Even now, he was of the same opinion, though he was aware that, after the standard had been fixed for so many years, it would be extremely inconvenient to change it again.
List of the Minority.
Allan, J. H.
Ellice, E.
Bernal, Ralph
Glenarchy, vise.
Bright, H.
Grattan, J.
Calcraft, J.
Griffith, J. W.
Chamberlayne, W
Hamilton, lord A.
Creevey, T.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Craddock, col
Hume, J.
Davies, T.
James, W.
De Crespigny, sir W.
Lamb, hon. G.
Denman, T.
Lennard, T. B.
Dickinson, W.
Leycester, N.
366
Lushington, S.
Ricardo, D.
Maxwell, J.
Robarts, A. W.
Monck, J. B.
Robinson, sir G.
Moore, P.
Talbot, R. W.
O'Grady, S.
Tierney, G.
Pelham, J. C.
White, L.
Philips, G. H. jun.
Wood, M.
Price, Robert
Poyntz, Wm. S.
TELLER.
Pryse, P.
Bennet, hon. H. G
The remainder of the resolutions were then agreed to.
COMBINATION OF WORKMEN.]—
Mr. Peter Moore
moved for leave to bring in a bill "to amend the laws against the Combination of Workmen."
Mr. Maxwell,
in seconding the motion, returned thanks to the hon. member for taking up the case of the poor manufacturer and artisan. It was needless to comment upon a law which bound the employed, and left the employer free as air; and which gave protection to wealth and power, by withdrawing it from poverty and weakness. If the administration would assist in repealing laws which were effective only on the feeble, they would do more for their own credit, for the satisfaction of the people, and for the good of the community, than they had done during the two last parliaments.
Mr. Huskisson
said, the subject which the hon. gentleman proposed to bring under the consideration of the House, was a very important one, and much deliberation would be necessary before any gentleman could pledge himself to support such a measure. He trusted that when the hon. member should have brought in the bill in as perfect a state as possible, he would postpone it for a convenient period, in order to afford the House an opportunity of duly considering its provisions.
Mr. Secretary Peel
could not see why the hon. member should not have entered into some detailed statement of the measure which he intended to bring forward.
Mr. P. Moore
said, he had no objection to gratify the right hon. secretary with a longer speech. His measure would embrace three objects; first, to bring back a great number of eminent artificers from the continent; secondly, to effect a better distribution of the profits of labour between the employers and the employed; and thirdly, to facilitate the means of recovering debts and deciding suits between artificers and their employers. He had been under the
367
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, March 4, 1823.
POOR LAWS.]—
Mr. Nolan
moved for leave to bring in a bill, for amending the laws relating to the maintenance and employment of the poor. The principles upon which the amendments he should propose were founded, were nearly the same as those he had submitted to the House last session. There were some trifling differences between the alterations he had now to propose, and those of his former motion; but he did not think fit to explain them now, as the second reading of the bill would afford a better opportunity for discussing the subject in all its forms.
Colonel Wood
took the opportunity of stating, that he should submit for the approbation of the House the resolutions he had proposed last session. As, however, he understood from his learned friend, that it would be inconvenient for him to be in his place until after the circuit, he should not call the attention of the house to this subject until that period. He understood the object of the bill was to provide some further coercion, by which the poorer classes would be prevented from applying for parochial assistance. To this he would never consent. The people of England had so much good temper, that they could be easily led; but they had so much high spirit, that the attempt to drive them would be as impracticable as it would be unjust.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
CHURCH ESTABLISHMENT OF IRELAND.—
Mr. Hume
, in rising to make his proposed motion relative to the Church Establishment of Ireland, assured the House, that he felt most deeply the difficulty of the subject; but, as no other member appeared to take the same view of the question that he entertained, he felt
368
369
370
371
372
373
l.
374
375
376
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.
l,
l.,
377
l.
378
Resident
758
Non-resident by exemption
81
Non-resident by dispensation
243
Without statement for what
157
Miscellaneous.
50
581
Total
1,289
379
sine quâ non
380
381
l.,
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
382
l.
l
l.
383
384
385
In the gift of the bishops
1,391
In the gift of the crown
293
Total in the gift of the crown and bishops
1,684
In lay hands
367
In University
21
Impropriate and vacant, and without churches or Incumbents
95
The total number of parishes in Ireland by that statement are
2,244
386
l.,
l.,
l.
387
388
389
1. "That the property of the church of Ireland, at present in the possession of the bishops, the deans, and chapters of Ireland, is public property, under the control and at the disposal of the legislature, for the support of religion, and for
390
2. "That it is expedient to inquire whether the present Church Establishment of Ireland be not more than commensurate to the services to be performed, both as regards the number of persons employed and the incomes they receive; and, if so, whether a reduction of the same should not take place, with due regard to all existing interests.
3. "That the peace and best interests of Ireland would be promoted by a commutation of all tithes, on such principles as shall be considered just and equitable to the present possessors, whether lay or clerical.
4. "That a Select Committee be appointed to consider in what way the objects stated in these resolutions can be best carried into effect."
Mr. Goulburn
felt it unnecessary to state, that he rose for the purpose of giving his most decided negative to the hon. member's resolutions. That was not the first time he heard opinions broached in that House, similar to those now advocated by the hon. member; but, wherever he met them, whether supported by the most powerful eloquence, or by that lengthened and minute detail, for which the hon. gentleman was distinguished, he should always be ready to oppose to them the best resistance which it was in his power to make. If, on this occasion, he felt any difficulty in answering the hon. member, it arose, not from the intricacy of the subject, not from the weight of the arguments to which he had to reply, but from the difficulty of restraining his indignation at witnessing the attempts now made to overthrow the foundation of all property, and to malign the established church, to which we were attached, not merely from habit and education, but from a practical experience of the incalculable benefits which we derived from it. He hoped he might be allowed to commence his argument by adverting to that part of the subject with which the hon. member for Aberdeen had concluded, and to express his astonishment
391
392
393
l.
394
395
396
397
398
399
Mr. Stuart
expressed his strong disapprobation of the proposed committee. He likewise defended the late primate of Ireland against the attack which had been made upon him by the hon. member. The assertions which that hon. member had made, in derogation of his conduct, were totally unfounded. Before the year 1807, there were no means of enforcing the clergy of Ireland to residence. The bill for that purpose was introduced by the late primate, who had been made the subject of such unfounded attack.
Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald,
knight of Kerry, said, that if he had felt some difficulty regarding the vote which he should give upon the resolutions then before the House, that difficulty had not been removed by the speech of the right hon. secretary. If he could not assent, on
400
401
402
Mr. Secretary Peel
thought the hon. gentleman might have deferred till the day after to-morrow offering an opinion as to the measure to be brought forward by his right hon. friend. Thus much confidence he considered due to the Irish government, who, it had been admitted, had selected for high offices those only who were recommended by their fitness to fill them. Credit, therefore, might have been given them for a disposition to reform abuses which had been shown to prevail. The hon. gentleman had stated, that the Protestant population had been withdrawn from a considerable district, in consequence of the neglect of the Protestant church. He begged to read what had led to the Protestant population referred to being so withdrawn. He then read a statement from the lord primate, which set forth, that the livings in these parishes were so low, that no clergyman could be found to accept of them, a factious vote of the Irish House of Commons having reduced the vicars to want, and made it necessary to unite several vicarages into one benefice. In a case where several of these had been thus united, the total income arising from them did not exceed 200
l.;
l.
403
404
405
Mr. Denman
said, he could not consent that the House of Commons should he disqualified, by the general assertions of the right hon. secretary, from entertaining any proposition which might be laid before them with a view to the benefit of the community. Not having heard all the speech of the hon. mover, he yet thought that he should desert his duty to an important part of the empire, if he resisted the proposed inquiry, especially as he was little disposed to expect efficient measures of reform from the gentlemen on the other side of the House, who avowed principles which would be fatal to all reform. As to the argument deduced by the right hon. secretary from the act of Union, if the object of that act was to preserve the establishment from any change, it would afford an argument against any change which should originate with the government, as well as against any which should originate with the House. If, on the other hand, the act of Union was not to stand in the way of reform,
406
407
Mr. Secretary Peel
thought it but fair to state, that he had never, in any debate on the Catholic question, urged the coronation oath against the concessions demanded. Such an argument he had never used; nor would he ever use one, which be was not prepared to avow acid maintain.
Mr. Denman
expressed his satisfaction at the explanation.
Mr. Plunkett
begged to trespass on the Mouse for a few moments. He did so with reluctance, but he felt he should be wanting to himself, to the situation which he had the honour to fill, and to the part which he was accustomed to take on that question, which had been incidentally connected with the debate of that night, if he were not to offer one or two observations on this occasion. The nature of church property was well known to the House. It was not for the purpose of speaking on this subject, that he had risen. But he could not allow the resolutions of the hon. member to be offered to the consideration of the House, without expressing, in terms as strong as the English language could supply, or the rules of parliament would allow him to use in that House, his sense of the folly and desperation of the measure which had been proposed, and without expressing the strongest reprobation of it which it was in his power to bestow. The plan of the hon. gentleman for governing the church of Ireland, if proper for that country, would be proper for England. If adopted by parliament, they would in effect declare, that the property of the hierarchy was public property, and was liable to be disposed of for purposes of religion, or for any other purposes. This would prepare the way for the downfall of the hierarchy: that of the throne must follow; and this would, of course, involve the overthrow of the constitution. He was no advocate for the divine right or the sacredness of church more than any other kind of property. But be was an advocate for the sacredness of all property. He spoke language which came home to the breast of every Englishman, when be said, that the church of England was an integral part
408
409
Mr. Monck
agreed with the hon. mover, that the ecclesiastical revenues were not so much intended to benefit the clergy as the people at large. When the House was called upon to vote millions for the building of churches, where could be the harm of asking whether the ecclesiastical revenues were not equal to bear the expense? Where could be the harm of taking something from the hierarchy of the church to be bestowed upon the inferior clergy? It was with this view that he should support the resolutions, and not with any desire of spoliation; because he did not think that either the church of England or of Ireland were too well endowed.
Mr. Grattan
said, that from what had fallen from the other side, he was apprehensive that no effectual measures were intended to be proposed by the government on this important subject. Inquiry was certainly necessary: he should, therefore, support the resolutions, without agreeing, in all the doctrines advanced by the hon. mover. He should never support any principles of spoliation; but he was of opinion, that the officers of the church in Ireland, and its revenues, ought to be regulated. By the present system, Ireland had been made a Catholic country; for there were Dot now more than four or five hundred thousand Protestants in Ireland.
Mr. Hume
, in rising to reply, put it to the right hon. gentlemen opposite, if his language, or if any thing which he had said, deserved the warmth which the right hon. gentleman had displayed. He should have scarcely troubled the House again, as the facts in his speech had not been met; but an attempt had been made to misrepresent his expressions, and he owed it to the House—he owed it to himself—he owed it to the cause he was advocating, to meet that attempt as it deserved to be met. The right hon. secretary for Ireland had attempted to mistify, and grossly to misrepresent his propositions, by comparing them to the proceedings of the parliament of 1640, which went to sweep away the whole property of the church from the then possessors, whilst his proposal was, to secure to the present incumbents their full incomes for their lives, and only to propose a change for
410
The Speaker
here called the hon. member to order. He said he had waited till the last moment, and had even not stopped the hon. member when he used the unparliamentary term of gross misrepresentations; but, when he went on to attribute motives to right hon. members, he felt it his duty to call him to order.
Mr. Hume,
in continuation, apologized for trespassing on the rules of the House, as he by no means wished or intended to apply any term improper or unparliamentary to any member of the House. The secretary for Ireland seemed to have entirely forgot his (Mr. H.'s) speech, and not to have read his resolutions. He (Mr. H.) had certainly a right to complain, that his opinions had been placed in an improper light, although no attempts had been made to answer his arguments. The right hon. gentleman had conjured up something said by some one else, in some other place, and this phantom he had combated with great vigour. In what instance, Mr. Hume asked, had he ever attacked individual property? He had specially guarded against such an interpretation both in his speech and his resolutions, by expressing his wish to respect all vested rights. What similarity, therefore, was there between his arguments and those which the right hon. secretary had been combating? The right hon. secretary had said, he would on no account be concerned in bringing forward resolutions which implied a sacrifice of honour, honesty, and justice. He (Mr. H.) was not, however, ashamed to put forth such resolutions; and he felt himself as incapable as the right hon. gentleman of supporting any thing which was dishonourable, dishonest, or unjust [Hear, hear!]. Because he differed from other gentlemen
411
Mr. Secretary Peel
rose to correct the hon. member. He had not stated, that the hon. member was the enemy of the country, but the enemy of inquiry.
Mr. Hume,
in continuation, said, that he wished to avoid personalties, and to have arguments—weighty arguments, which alone were worthy of such a subject. The right hon. the attorney-general for Ireland had said, that he could not suffer the first resolution to pass, without expressing, in the strongest terms the English language could supply, or parliamentary usage would permit, his detestation of the desperation and folly of the individual who proposed it [Hear, hear!].
Mr. Plunkett
rose to correct the hon. member. He had never mentioned the individual who brought forward the measure; but he had described the measure as full of desperation and folly.
Mr. Hume
, in continuation, said, that as the measure was declared to be full of desperation and folly, and as he was the agent who introduced it to the House, he could not but suppose these epithets were applied to himself. But really to listen to the speech of the right hon. the attorney-general for Ireland, the House might have supposed that church property was touched, or rather attempted to be meddled with, for the first time. In the last session, the question had been discussed, and he was happy to see the discussion had already done good. The right hon. gentleman had then talked of commutation of tithes, when proposed by him (Mr. H.), as a profanation; but now, this measure was sanctioned by the government, and brought forward by the secretary for Ireland. Some progress, therefore, had been made in church affairs; and he hoped soon to see more. The right hon. attorney-general for Ireland had said, the Catholic question was completely incorporated in his whole nature. He (Mr. H.) hoped the time would therefore come, when, to support it effectually, would be conformable to his interest. If my whole
412
413
414
415
Mr. Goulburn
begged to deny the having charged the hon. member with any want of honour or justice. All he had said was, that, consistently with his own sense of honour and justice, he could not vote for the motion. His objectionwas—and with him it was a decided one— that the spoliation of the church must
416
List of the Minority.
Barratt, S. M.
Marjoribanks, S.
Becher, W. W.
Martin, John
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Maxwell, S.W.
Benyon, B.
Normanby, visc.
Birch, J
Palmer, C.
Calcraft, J. H.
Palmer, C.F.
Campbell, hon. G. P.
Philips, G. sen.
Carew, C. S.
Philips, G. jun.
Caulfield, hon. H.
Power, R.
Clifton, visc.
Price, R.
Colborne, N. W. R.
Pryse, Pryse
Creevey, T.
Ramsden, J. C.
Craddock, col.
Ricardo, D.
Davies, col.
Ridley, sir M. W.
De Crespigny, sir W.
Robarts, A. W.
Denman, T.
Robarts, G. J.
Ebrington, visc.
Robinson, sir G.
Ellis, G. J. W. A.
Sefton, earl of
Farquharson, A.
Smith, John
Fergusson, sir R.
Smith, George
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Smith, W.
Fitzgerald, M.
Stewart, W.
Glenorchy, visc.
Taylor, M. A.
Grattan, J.
Titchfield, marquis
Griffith, J. W.
Webbe, col.
Hamilton, lord A.
White, Luke
Hobhouse, J. C.
White, col.
Honywood, W. P.
Wilson, sir R.
Hutchinson, hon. H.
Wood, alderman
James, Wm.
Wyvill, M.
Lambton, J. G.
TELLERS.
Leycester, R.
Hume, J.
Macdonald, J.
Monck, J. B.
PIRACY IN THE WEST INDIES—DOTTEREL AND CARNATION CRUIZERS.]—
Mr. Marryat
rose to call the attention of the House to certain letters written by the secretary of the Admiralty, in October last, in the name of the board, and intended for the information of the public. These letters, he said, contain statements directly at variance with fact, as can be proved by documents of unquestionable authority, as well as by the evidence of various respectable and uninterested eye-witnesses; and therefore this is a case which calls loudly for investigation. Hitherto, the authenticity of all communications coming from the public departments of government has been so unimpeachable, that when we would describe information as being true beyond all possibility of doubt, we do so in one word, by saying that it is
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
"Out on ye, owls, nothing but songs of death?
"There, take thou that, till thou bring better news:"
428
Sir G. Cockburn
said, he was not without hopes of proving to the satisfaction of the House, that the statement of the hon. gentleman was erroneous, and his comments unfounded; for he (Mr. Marryat) had mixed up with his statements, observations on the board of Admiralty. He (sir G. Cockburn) would therefore first address himself to reply to the insinuations thrown out against the board, and would afterwards reply to the statements
429
430
431
432
Mr. T. Wilson
expressed his regret, that any misunderstanding had taken
433
Sir Isaac Coffin
said, the conduct of the gentlemen at Lloyd's reminded him of the fable of the frog and the ox. As an old officer, he was ready to declare, that no board had done so much for the country as the present board of Admiralty. The behaviour of these gentlemen at Lloyd's had been most indecent. The lord mayor, or the directors of the East India company would have considered it no disgrace to wait on the Admiralty. He defended the conduct of admiral Rowley, and said, that a more honourable person was not to be found. The charge against the Admiralty would, he trusted, be treated with contempt.
Mr. Bright,
though he concurred in much of what had fallen from the hon. officer, was not satisfied that sufficient protection had been afforded by the Admiralty to the trade on the West India station. The force might have been well employed, such as it was; but it did not appear to him that it was sufficient. The hon. member quoted a resolution of a meeting of the merchants of Kingston, complaining that the seas were infested by pirates, and that the squadron employed was inadequate to the defence of those seas. He also observed, that the island of Nassau had fitted out two vessels at its own expense, for which they ought to have been repaid by the government. This was another proof of the inadequacy of the naval force. He trusted that the Admiralty would omit no means of prosecuting the men who were already taken, and that they would take care to protect the trade in the ensuing season.
Sir G. Cockburn
said, that the two vessels provided by the island of Nassau were not fit for the service upon which they were employed, being too large to act with effect against the pirates. The Admiralty had felt it their duty to send vessels which could follow them any where, and also to send an overwhelming force.
Mr. Alderman Thompson
regretted that the gentlemen at Lloyd's did not go to the Admiralty, but hoped that a good understanding would for the future exist, and that the hon. gentleman would consent to withdraw his motion.
434
Mr. Secretary Canning
rose, for the purpose of enforcing the suggestion of the hon. member who had spoken last. He trusted that, as every fair purpose which could have been hoped for had been answered by the discussion, the hon. mover would not think it necessary to persevere in obtaining a vote which would cast blame on the Admiralty, when, in fact, there was no real ground for censure. He should, however, deal unfairly with the House, if he omitted to state, that having been the only member in town at the period of the communications alluded to, he had been of opinion, after the last letter from the committee of Lloyd's, that no option was left to the Admiralty as to any further communication. Before that letter, he had had every wish for the continuance of the intercourse; but, when the committee thought proper to state, that they would receive no other than a written communication from the first public hoard in the kingdom, and when the alternative had been presented, either that the Admiralty should wait on Lloyd's, or that Lloyd's should wait on the Admiralty, it could not be reasonably expected that the latter would submit. But now that it was agreed on all hands, that the intercourse and communication between those boards was for the public benefit, he hoped that they would go on as had hitherto been the custom, and that after that night, none of the disagreements and misunderstandings which had broken out would continue. If any difficulty still existed as to the mode in which the invitation should be couched, that might he obviated by a reference to some established authority, on points of etiquette so momentous. The gentlemen might consult Dr. Trusler's principles of Politeness, or some other book of equal weight, and then they would readily devise some means of giving the invitation, by which the possibility of giving unintentional offence might be avoided. There was another point, however, of a nature a little more serious, and upon this he wished to say a few words. The measures which had been taken, involved not merely a question of department. It was found that no amount of naval force alone could accomplish the object which was so desirable; namely, the extirpation of the pirates, unless their operations were assisted by a land force. This latter force must consist either of the inhabitants of
435
Mr. Marryat
said, that the committee of Lloyd's had been urged to take the steps they had taken, not by a feeling of individual interest, but from an imperious sense of public duty. He concluded by stating, that he would evince his concurrence in that spirit of conciliation which had been recommended by the right honourable gentleman, by withdrawing his motion.
The motion was accordingly withdrawn.
436
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, March 5, 1823.
SOCIETY OF JESUITS—PETITION OF
Sir T. Lethbridge
rose for the purpose of presenting a petition from Mr. William Parker, of the city of Cork. He had no acquaintance with the petitioner, but he believed he was well know to the hon. member for Cork. The petition contained various allegations, for the truth of which the hon. member did not intend to vouch; but as it contained information from various quarters, relative to a subject which was shortly to come before the House, he had thought fit to present it. There was contained in it also one charge, which in particular he would not be understood to vouch for: it was against an individual holding an office, and whose name he would not have mentioned if he could have avoided it—he meant Christopher Bird, the colonial secretary at the Cape of Good Hope. The petition set forth, that the petitioner had headed a party of settlers, who, in the year 1819, had proceeded with the authority of government to that colony. He went on to state the petitioner's belief, that most of the calamities which had afflicted the world would appear, if they were properly explained, to have proceeded from the secret and insidious practices of the Jesuits, who, under the pretence of being a religious society, were, in fact, a formidable political sect. That they had been founded by pope Paul 3rd, for the purpose of counteracting the glorious effects of the reformation. The history of the Jesuits proved that they had always been hostile to monarchs, whether Protestant or Catholics. However beneficial the propagation of knowledge might be, the Jesuits must, in the words of the historian Hume, "bear the reproach from posterity, that by the very nature of their institution, they were engaged to pervert learning, the only effectual remedy against superstition, into a nourishment of that infirmity; and as their erudition was chiefly of the ecclesiastical and scholastic kind (though a few members have cultivated polite literature), they were only the more enabled by that acquisition to refine away the plainest dictates of morality, and to erect a regular system of casuistry, by which prevarication, perjury, and every crime, when it served
437
l.
438
439
Mr. Hutchinson
said, he would make a few observations, as he had been particularly alluded to by the hon. baronet. He was acquainted with Mr. Parker, the petitioner, who, in every relation of life, was a most exemplary character. He believed him to be an aggrieved individual; who, when he left this country, had indulged in expectations, which unfortunately were not realized. He proceeded with a very large family and several followers, to the Cape of Good Hope; and certainly he had a claim upon government, because the hopes which had been held out to him and others proved to be fallacious; he lost his property, and was seriously injured. He lamented exceedingly that Mr. Parker had alluded to colonel Bird, the colonial secretary. He had felt it to be his duty to inquire who col. Bird was, and he understood that, for several years, he was employed in the department of the commander-in-chief. He was afterwards placed in a subordinate situation at the Cape of Good Hope, and was ultimately raised to that of colonial secretary. He had been introduced to public life, under the auspices of the late Mr. Windham. The
gravamen
440
441
Mr. Wilmot
protested against the discussion which the hon. baronet had introduced, as being wholly irrelevant to the matter immediately before the House. The petition set forth that Mr. Parker went out as a settler to the Cape of Good Hope; that he failed in realizing the expectations he had formed; that he had encountered various misfortunes, and all this he attributed to colonel Bird, whom he accused of being a Jesuit. If either of the hon. members thought Mr. Parker had any reason to complain of the conduct of government, it would be competent for him to present a petition on the subject, and it would then remain for him (Mr. W.) to lay before the House all the information which the colonial department possessed relative to his case. If the two hon. members were to devote the whole of their time till the same hour tomorrow, in the perusal of Mr. Parker's correspondence with the colonial department, they would not be able to get through it. Mr. Parker imputed the failure of the harvest at the Cape, and all
442
non sequitur
Mr. Hobhouse
said, he should be very sorry to do any thing which the hon. baronet might consider indecorous; but when he had heard all the misfortunes of the sister isle, even the failure of the crop of potatoes, ascribed to the Jesuits, he could not avoid smiling. The hon. baronet wished the House to imitate the conduct of the emperor of China in 1726; and because his Tartarian majesty had, at that period, expelled the Jesuits, he conceived the British government ought to pursue the same course in 1823. He hoped the petitioner would come to the bar of the House, and bring a Jesuit with him. A Jesuit was a sort of historical creature. He had travelled as far, he believed, as the hon. baronet, and yet he had never once met with a Jesuit. He should really be glad if a Jesuit were produced, that they might see what sort of an animal it was with which they had to contend [A laugh.]
Mr. Hume
said, he conceived that Mr. Parker had good ground of complaint against the colonial government; but he certainly had no right to mix it up with observations on the Jesuits. With respect to the petitions presented by the hon. member for Armagh, they were not, as he had been informed, signed by any respectable individuals. Could that hon. member, of his own knowledge, state where any establishment of Jesuits existed? For his own part, he should have
443
Mr. Brownlow
said, that when, on former evening, he was asked whether he knew of the existence of Jesuits in Ireland, he had pleaded ignorance. He had, however, since received letters from different parts of Ireland, censuring his ignorance on that point, and stating that there were unquestionably establishments of Jesuits in that country.
Ordered to lie on the table.
ORANGE SOCIETIES IN IRELAND.]—
Mr. Abercromby
said, that before he entered upon the subject of his motion, relative to certain secret societies in Ireland, commonly called Orange societies, he was anxious, in order to avoid misconception, to declare, that he had no intention whatever of alluding to the merits or demerits of the marquis Wellesley's administration. Whenever that subject came to be discussed, he should consider himself as free as any other member of the House to deliver his opinions upon it. Neither was it his intention to interfere, in the smallest degree, with what was called the Catholic question. The subject which he should develope that night, he would treat in such a manner as to entitle him, he trusted, to the votes both of the advocates for concession to the Catholics, and the supporters of their political exclusion. His motion would rest on general grounds, and would not disentitle him from receiving the support of both the classes he had mentioned, or of that of any other description of persons. He was well aware, that the notice of his motion was said to have created considerable agitation on the part of certain classes of persons in Ireland. It might be so; and he was ready to admit and assume that to be the fact; but, so far from its being a reason against the discussion of this subject, he thought the very agitation which was said to prevail, was the strongest argument in support of the necessity of consideration with the least possible delay. When it was said that persons connected with this Orange system felt averse from this question, it ought at the same time to be admitted, that there were others, and a very great majority of the people of Ireland, who loudly called for this discussion. Under such circumstances, it was incumbent upon parliament to probe the matter to the bottom, and pronounce a legislative opinion upon the merits of the case. If it
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
*
*
459
460
Mr. Goulburn
said, he had never risen with stronger feelings of anxiety than those by which he was then overpowered—an anxiety founded upon no personal considerations, but arising out of a feeling that this question was so closely bound up with another subject which was likely to come before the House, that he feared it would open a door, not only for premature discussion, but for much misrepresentation. He could not but regret that the hon. and learned member had thought it his duty to agitate the subject at the present moment; and the more so, as there was, in a short time, a question to be brought forward which would, to a certain extent, involve the present. He had hoped that the hon. and learned member would have yielded to the request made by a right hon. and learned friend of his, to postpone his motion for a short time. He trusted, however, that the fears he entertained with respect to the discussion, would turn out to be unfounded. And here he felt bound to pay the hon. and learned member, who introduced the motion, the tribute of his thanks for having done so, without making a single observation which could prejudice that discussion to which he (Mr. G.) alluded. And he would implore those honourable members who might take a part in the discussion, to follow the example so laudably set them, and at least to do the Irish government the justice of not bringing their conduct prematurely under discussion. It could not be expected that he should concur in the motion made by the hon. and learned member; but he had no difficulty in stating, that he concurred, in a greater or
461
462
463
464
465
Sir J. Newport
declared, that he would not support the motion, if he thought it calculated to throw any censure on the Irish government. Until he had heard the right hon. secretary declare the intention of the Irish government to assimilate the law of Ireland with regard to secret societies, with the laws of England, he could not have anticipated that any such measure had been in contemplation; knowing, though he did, that such a law was much more necessary in Ireland than it had ever been in England. Year after year had he wearied the House with his endeavours to convince it of the impolicy of allowing any secret societies to exist. It was, therefore, most satisfactory to him, and he had little doubt but it was equally satisfactory to his hon. and learned friend, to hear that the provisions of the act of 1799 were to be extended to Ireland. That was the way to proceed. It was idle to permit the existence of these secret societies under any pretence. They tended to embarras the government, and to divide the people; and Ireland, unfortunately, had too long been governed by the policy of dividing
466
Mr. Dawson
said, that representing a body of electors who had the strongest feeling upon the subject, and entertaining himself, feelings at least as strong as theirs, he must claim the indulgence of the House for a short time. Perhaps in his situation it would be the more prudent course to remain silent, but he could not conceal from himself, that silence on such a subject would be as disgraceful to him as unjust to his constituents. He expressed his acquiescence in every thing which fell from his right hon. friend, the secretary for Ireland, but he hoped he should be pardoned for entertaining feelings somewhat warmer on the subject. He spoke as an Irishman, and as one connected with all those who were attacked by the present motion; his right hon. friend, as an Englishman, and uninfluenced by any local ties. He rejoiced that an opportunity had at length arrived of discussing the question on its own individual merits; that the day had come when truth might be heard, when the calumnies cast upon a loyal body of men might be refuted, and when the House and the country, by hearing both sides of the question, might decide how far the Orange association was illegal, and how far it deserved the imputations which had been so unsparingly heaped upon it. An outcry had been raised, whatever might be the merits and demerits of the association, and no effort had been spared to create an unpopular feeling against it. The public press, particularly the press of Ireland, had entered into a general confederacy to give the name of Orangeman to every party, nay, to every
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
l.
476
477
478
Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald,
knight of Kerry, said, that among sentiments that might be controverted, and statements that might be disputed, his hon. friend, who last spoke, had mingled many expressions calculated to augment the spirit, the existence of which the House and the country so deeply regretted. Upon authority that could not be questioned, he was provided with the means of exhibiting a picture, the very reverse of that which his hon. friend had presented. No man could approach the question with move pain than himself, because he was called upon to accuse and criminate a large body of his countrymen, some of Ahem his nearest and his oldest friends. But, while he recognized private worth, its very existence showed the baneful influence of the worst principles upon the best hearts, and the clearest understandings. He denied that the Orange societies arose out of any disaffected spirit or practices, on the part of the Roman Catholics: he denied it on the authority of the legislature itself, of the king's speeches to the Irish parliament, and of the reports of secret committees, of which he had been a member. He denied it on his own distinct recollection of the evidence given in 1798, by the directors of the United Irishmen. That evidence stated, that, down to Christmas, 1796, when the French, invaded the south of Ireland, not a single Catholic had been admitted to that association. In that formidable conspiracy, to which any other in any country, was mere child's play, a society of 500,000 men, bound, by secret oaths, to overturn the government, and to establish, by means of a bloody revolution, a republic on the ruins of the constitution—they had evidence on oath, that for years there was not a single Catholic, with the exception indeed of one of the directors, Dr. Macuevin, who professed himself a Catholic, though he believed him to be a man of no religion at all. That very in-
479
Mr. Dawson
denied having uttered
480
Mr. M. Fitzgerald
alluded to that part of his hon. friend's speech, in which he had described the manner of putting down the rebellion in Ireland. His hon. friend had spoken of the rebellion as having been put down by the Orangemen, who were then the only loyal subjects. How did his hon. friend propose to sustain that assertion? The rebellion had been put down, not by the Orangemen singly, but by a combination of all parties. In addition to the regular troops, there had been employed in putting down the rebellion, a yeomanry, composed indiscriminately of Catholics and Protestants, and a militia, twenty-six or twenty-seven thousand strong, three-fourths of whom were Catholics. He had been surrounded by Catholics during that rebellion, who displayed as much ardor, and as much loyalty, as could be found in any class of his majesty's subjects. Why, the fact was proved by the royal thanks given equally to both classes for their zeal and exertion. He did not state these things to controvert his hon. friend's assertion, for the assertion controverted itself; but he stated them because he wished to impress upon the House the extent to which party spirit could actuate even the most generous and enlightened minds. What, then, could be expected from the humbler and unenlightened orders, forced by their condition into constant contact with the lower classes of the Catholics, and having those same Catholics pointed out to them, from hour to hour, as rebellious subjects, or objects of detestation? The effect of all this might be seen in a contrast—a lamentable Contrast—between the state of society in England and in Ireland. Whatever might be the violence of political differences in England, there needed but some great national object at once to secure unanimity. On that feeling the crown and the government of England could always depend with safety. But in Ireland every thing resolved itself into faction. Government there could rely on no support, but that which it obtained by arming one faction against another. The country contained the raw material of a good public mind; but that public mind could only be formed and developed by an honest, an impartial administration of policy and laws—by showing to all parties; Catholics and Protestants, that it was not
481
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, the House
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
Mr. Grattan
was of opinion, that government ought to proceed vigorously in putting down these factious societies. Such of the members as were placemen, ought to be turned out of their offices; for that was the only effectual mode of staying their violent proceedings.
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, it was not his intention to detain the House long; nor indeed should he have risen at all, had it not been for the direct personal appeal which had been made to him. It was the less necessary for him to answer the hon. and learned gentleman, since every principle which he could wish to advocate—every measure of which he could desire the adoption—had been supported by the united sentiments of the House. A right hon. gentleman who spoke early in the debate, had said, that his hopes of a favourable result would have been much greater, if the present lord lieutenant had, like lord Cornwallis, been connected with a government, not divided upon a particular measure, in which the welfare of Ireland was concerned. Whatever his wishes might be on this subject, he felt persuaded, from past experience, that it was scarcely possible to find a cabinet united on the great question of the Catholic claims, however entire their concurrence might he in other leading political questions. He abated none of the sanguineness of hope with which he had always addressed himself to that question. These sentiments he did not now state for the first time. They were the same that he had entertained and avowed at all periods, and when he could not be supposed to have any interest in taking such a part. But, while he admitted, that unanimity of opinion did not exist with respect to that single question, among the members of the government, he could assure the House, that no government could be more disposed to administer the affairs of Ireland with an equal hand, or more united in the determination to support that government in Ireland, under whose influence the prin-
489
Mr. Abercromby,
in reply, observed, that if the right hon. gentleman expected such a discussion as he had described, it was in the power of ministers to have prevented it, by communicating what they had now stated before the discussion came on. Every object that he had in view would be effectually attained by the course which government had stated it to be their intention to adopt. His object was to have an effectual law in Ireland, as well as in this country, to extinguish societies bound together by a secret oath, and the secretary of state did great injustice to his views and feelings if he thought him capable of continuing a contest with him, after having obtained the measure for which he was anxious. He had felt himself justified, however, in making the motion, under the circumstances, and especially as he was persuaded, that the discussion would afford great satisfaction to a numerous part of the population of Ireland. He trusted that, after the explanation which had been given, the House would not object to his withdrawing his motion.
The motion was accordingly withdrawn.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 6, 1823.
MESSAGE RESPECTING THE KING'S PROPERTY.]—
Mr. Secretary Peel
presented the following message from the King:—
"George R.
"His majesty being informed that doubts have arisen touching the powers vested in his majesty to dispose of any
490
PETITION FROM COL. ALLEN, COMPLAINING OF THE LOSS OF HIS COMMISSION.]—
Colonel Davies rose
to present a petition, which, he said, disclosed a case of great individual hardship. The petitioner was col. Allen, who, having served many years in the army, had at, untied the rank of lieutenant-colonel. In 1817, he was with his regiment, the 55th, in the island of Jersey, where he had some disagreement with general Bailey, who commanded the garrison there. General Bailey had accused him of making false returns, and that he should be suspended from the command of his regiment. It was impossible for col. Allen to submit to this imputation: he invited an investigation into his conduct; and this application having been disregarded by general Bailey, he wrote to head-quarters, preferring the same request. He heard nothing in reply for three months, when an order came down, not for the inquiry which he had sought, but for a court-martial, by which he was tried on three distinct charges: for making false returns; for trying men at drum-head courts-martial; and for having more men in the barracks than they ought to have contained. On the first charge, the sentence was tantamount to an acquittal; for, although the returns were technically incorrect, they had been pronounced not to be willfully false. On the second, he had been found guilty: but with the exception of the evidence not being reduced to writing, a court-martial at the drum-head was as satisfactory as a trial by any other method. The sentence was, that col. Allen should be placed 12 months lower on the list, and be reprimanded. The prince regent had been pleased to confirm this sentence, and had moreover ordered, as it appeared inconsistent with the well-being of the service that col. Allen should continue in com-
491
Lord Palmerston
said, that on general principles, any interference with that branch of the prerogative which related to the appointment and removal of the officers of the army, was totally inexpedient. Of all the privileges of the crown, none was more ancient, and none had been of more uninterrupted exercise, than that of dismissing officers, whether they had been tried or not, or whether any reason was or was not assigned for their dismissal. It was a power held, not for the benefit of the crown, but for the maintenance of the rights and liberties of the people. He would argue, that, upon general principles, this was not a case which called for the interference of the House. He might go farther, and state, that there were circumstances connected with it which afforded much stronger ground for refusing any parliamentary interposition. Col. Allen had been tried on three distinct charges, on all of which be was found guilty. On two of those charges, the verdict was accompanied by a particular qualification. On the third charge, he was found guilty, without any qualification. The noble lord adverted specifically to these charges, and to the frequency, and severity of punishments in the regiment which col. Allen commanded. In no very long interval, 79 soldiers had been flogged, and 4,817 lashes had been inflicted. General Bailey had issued an order, that no inflictions of punishment should be carried into execu-
492
493
Sir R. Wilson
said, that corporal punishment was wholly unnecessary in the army. It was liable to great abuse, and ought to be put an end to. He was sorry that the commander-in-chief did not avail himself of the opportunity which this court-martial afforded him, of stating his disapproval of the infliction of corporal punishment.
Mr. Bennet
said, that when it was proved, that corporal punishment had been unnecessarily and improperly resorted to, the commander-in-chief was, he conceived, bound to express his disapprobation of the system.
Mr. Hume
observed, that when he had Made a statement on the subject of corporal punishment, last session, he was told, that no such thing ever took place in the army. The truth, however, had now come out; and it appeared that corporal punishment was inflicted to a great extent.
Colonel Davies
said, he had no acquaintance whatever with colonel Allen.
494
l.
Mr. Wynn
contended, that, if ever there was a case in which the prerogative of the crown had been exerted with propriety, and tempered with leniency, it was the case of colonel Allen.
Sir Joseph Yorke
said, that the noble lord had made very light of the charges which had been preferred against certain individuals in col. Allen's regiment. One of these was an accusation against a soldier for not levelling his piece properly. Assuredly, it was of some importance, that soldiers should know how to use their arms effectively. It was not an easy matter to teach them to do so. He recollected, when a sergeant of marines was drilling a number of men, so badly did they point their pieces, that he declared he would stand their fire for a halfpenny a shot, and was confident he should make a fortune by it. Many of those raw soldiers appeared more anxious to direct their muskets against Jupiter or Saturn than against the enemy. Was drunkenness a light crime? Was it fit, ting that a soldier who thus misconducted himself, should not be punished? When no impression could be made on a man's reason, it was necessary sometimes to make an impression on his back. Gentlemen seemed to be extremely hostile to the system of corporal punishment. If it were abolished in the army, he supposed it would also be abolished in the navy. He was not, however, prepared to say, that corporal punishment should be discontinued in the navy; and he hoped, if its entire abolition were attempted, that it would be resisted. Much blame had been imputed to colonel Allen; but why should he alone be selected for censure? Was there no other officer in the regiment who concurred in his proceedings?
Ordered to lie on the table.
IRISH TITHES COMPOSITION AND COMMUTATION BILLS.]—
Mr. Goulburn
said it was within the recollection of the House, that, during the last session, he had been repeatedly pressed by several
495
496
497
vice versâ.
498
Mr. M. Fitzgerald
gave great credit to government, for the efforts they were making to diminish the evils under which Ireland laboured. With regard to the measures now proposed, he did not distinctly understand how that which was to be permanent would work, nor how that which was to be temporary was to be limited in time. He could not see the advantage in the latter of the references every three years; nor did he think that part of the bill which required the assembly of special vestries applicable in many parts of Ireland. In many parishes of Ireland there was not even a substantial farmer, much less a resident gentleman; and, in many instances, not a single individual belonging to the established church. He was apprehensive that the new estimates which were to be made, would be attended with great uncertainty, especially as much scope must necessarily be given to the operation of conflicting interests. He was sure that the proposition which he (Mr. M. Fitzgerald) was going to recommend would materially contribute to the security and comfort of the established church. While he perfectly agreed with the right honourable gentleman in the principle of the arrangement which he proposed, and thought that it was highly desirable to include in it the tithe of agistment, he could not think the vote of the Irish parliament of the year 1735 a robbery of the clergy. Just before that vote, several claims had been set up by the, clergy to the tithe of agistment, although he believed no such tithe had actually
499
Sir H. Parnell
wished to know, on what principle of valuation the composition was to be made, whether the full tenth, the value in the proctor's books, or the actual value of the tithes received? To the first he should altogether object. He hoped that, in the progress of the bill, the regulations would be made somewhat more compulsory. He wished to secure the total abolition of tithes, and not to allow any parish to continue them. If the select vestries were to be composed only of persons who paid large sums for tithes, now that pasture lands were to be made liable, it would be the interest of the vestries in grazing districts, to preserve the present system of tithes, by which their own lands would be free, and the burden left upon the poor tillage cottiers and farmers. He thought the measure would prove an effectual remedy for the evil of tithes. It would wholly do away with the annual valuation of proctors, and the oppressive collection by proctors and tithe farmers. By combining the principle of an acreable tax and a commutation for land, it had the advantages of both plans. In respect to giving land, he thought that regulation the best part of the measure, and that the commutation of land for tithe might be accomplished without any loss to the public. The thanks of the public were due to the right hon. gentleman, and the noble marquis at the head of the Irish government, for this important measure. It would put an end to a system of great grievance and oppression, and contribute essentially to secure the tranquillity of Ireland.
Sir J. Newport
was persuaded, that the measures proposed could not fail to do great good. He was of opinion, that the valuation should be made, not on claims and demands, but on receipts. It was extremely satisfactory to him, that the burthen of tithes was to be more equally borne than hitherto. The bill, he must say, promised most fairly. That it was in some degree complicated in its details, was, in a great measure, attributable to
500
Mr. Carew
expressed his satisfaction that the right hon. secretary had moved for leave to bring in the present bill. He held in his hand the resolutions of the grand jury of Wexford, in favour of a just and fair commutation of tithes, such as might secure the stability, dignity, and independence of the established church, and the general interests of the community. In those principles he fully concurred. He would never advocate a system which did not protect the interests of all parties. Provided the clergy performed those duties, for the performance of which, tithes and church property were originally appropriated, he would never consent to invade that property; but when he found a general complaint of the neglect and non-performance of those duties, he did say that such a system required amendment.
Mr. Spring Rice
could not resist the temptation of congratulating Ireland on the prospect which was opened to her, by the conduct of government. What could present a more striking contrast than the present and the last session of parliament in that respect? The last session commenced with the suspension of the Habeas Corpus in Ireland, which was followed by the Insurrection act. The present session was distinguished by measures of conciliation and wisdom. The right hon. secretary had last night given notice of a measure, the tendency of which would be to unite all classes of the community in Ireland. To-night he had brought forward a measure, which would put an end to nearly all the grievous and oppressive practices of the tithe system. Such benefits to Ireland would not be thrown away, but would produce a rich harvest of gratitude and attachment. The only difficulty which he contemplated in the bill, related to the complexity of the machinery. The Protestant population were, in some parts of Ireland, so reduced by circumstances, that he feared materials
501
Mr. Hutchinson
said, that having, year after year, declared in his place, that justice was not done to Ireland, he felt it to be his duty to express his great satisfaction at the complete change of disposition in that respect, which manisfested itself in the conduct of his majesty's present ministers. In thanking them for Ireland, he felt that he was thanking them for the empire; which the course now pursuing would render irresistible. His thanks were due to the whole of his majesty's government. They were due to the chancellor of the exchequer, for the kind and generous manner in which he had spoken of Ireland; they were due to the secretary of state, who had declared his wish to avoid all irritating subjects; and they were due to the other secretary of state, who had declared the determination of ministers to support the present government of Ireland. This last-mentioned declaration was calculated to do infinite good to Ireland. Having for years maintained in that House an angry opposition against government with respect to Irish affairs, he felt it his duty, now that he saw the anxiety which existed to do every thing that was right and proper, to give to government his warm approbation and support.
Colonel Barry
was also anxious to express his warm approbation of the present measure.
Mr. V. Fitzgerlad
said, that, according to his view of the measure, it was calculated to redeem all the promises which had been made by government on the subject.
Leave was given to bring in the said bills.
NATIONAL DEBT REDUCTION ACTS.]—
On the order of the day for bringing up the report of the committee on the said acts,
Mr. Calcraft
said, it was his opinion, that the surplus revenue of the country would be more beneficially applied, if
502
bonâ fide
Colonel Wood
said, if he did not in his conscience believe that a real sinking fund was most necessary for the interests of the country, he would not vote for the bill.
Mr. W. Smith
was convinced, that the country at large would be much more benefitted by the further diminution of its burthens, than it would be by the paying off of a comparatively small part of the national debt, for the period during which peace might continue.
503
Mr. Benett,
of Wilts, contended, that the repeal of taxes must always benefit the landed interest. By taking off taxes from the tenant, the parliament, in fact, gave so much to the landlord.
Sir J. Shelley
did not think he should be exorbitant, when he asked the chancellor of the exchequer to repeal two millions more taxes, in addition to the two millions of which he had already given notice. A surplus of three millions for a sinking fund, or to meet possible contingencies, would then be preserved.
Mr. Hume
said, that the sinking fund had been attended with loss to the country. If it remained on its present footing, at the end of any given number of years, it would not be found to have reduced the national debt one farthing. The minister of the day would always apply the surplus in time of need, to any purpose but that for which it was intended. The chancellor of the exchequer had stated on a former night, that the debt, by means of the sinking fund, had been reduced 24 millions. To show that the statement was not correct, he called upon the House to attend to the following calculations:—The amount of unredeemed funded debt, 5th Jan. 1816, was 816,311,939
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
504
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.;
d.
d.
l.
l.;
l.;
l.;
l.;
l.
Mr. John Smith
believed it would have been impossible, without the aid of the sinking fund, to have raised the immense supplies that we had raised during the war. He thought, indeed, that even what was called the sham sinking fund, had been useful during the war, as it had tended to keep up the prices of stocks, and to support public credit. Whenever the funds had fallen, the commercial interest would be found to have suffered. He remembered the three per cents at one time as low as 47; and scarcely a merchant at the time knew one day whether he should be able to take up his acceptances the next. Recommending, in its fullest extent, economy and retrenchment, he should vote for the propositions of the chancellor of the exchequer.
Mr. Monck,
under the present circumstances of the country, contended, that a sinking fund was not only useless, but decidedly mischievous. The arguments
505
l.
1.,
l.
Mr. Ricardo
said, it was true that the government of America had borrowed 4,000,000 dollars, and that, by bringing capital from other countries, it had, in fact, improved its resources. It was also true, that the effect of the sinking fund was at present to raise prices against ourselves. But this was true of every sinking fund. The question was, had not the sinking fund reduced the annual charge? It certainly would do so if correctly applied. A real sinking fund, if properly appropriated, was a great good. To a fictitious sinking fund he had many objections. But there was a great difference between the two. A real sinking fund applied to pay off the debt, would raise the price of stocks, and enable us to borrow on better terms. Many members had no hopes that a real sinking
506
l.
507
Mr. Baring
said, that, with every respect which he might have for his hon. friend's talents and the ingenuity which marked the speech which he had just made, he must be allowed to say he had never listened to one which led to such—(not to say absurd—that term would savour of want of courtesy), but so singular a conclusion. To begin with the plan of pay-
508
pro tanto
509
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
The House divided: For the amendment, 57; Against it, 93. The report was then agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, March 7, 1823.
KING'S PROPERTY BILL.]—
The House having resolved itself into a committee on the King's Message,
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he should propose that the chairman should ask for leave to bring in a bill, concerning the disposition of certain property belonging to his majesty. By the statute of queen Anne, and several other acts, the power of the crown to alienate real property was restricted. In 1799 another act was passed, which removed those restrictions, as respected real property that might be considered as the private property of his majesty. That act took away such restrictions as regarded all real property purchased out of the privy purse, all real property purchased with any monies not appropriated to the public service, or with monies received by the crown from any person or persons whatever, except-
510
jure coronœ
Mr. Hume
wished to know what was the nature of the distinction meant to be taken between property possessed by him as private property acquired as a subject? The act of 39 Geo. 3 directed, that the property should be consigned to trustees, that is should not go to the king at all, but become the property of the public: The statute of 1 Anne, too, prevented the king from acquiring any property. He had asked, last session, if the late king had made any will? and had been answered, that he had not. So that in this case the property should revert to the public; and the landed property had accordingly been taken under the care of the commissioners of woods and forests. He wished to know whether the present measure was to relate to the property which the king had inherited from his late majesty.
Mr. Peel
replied, that what property the king held from his late majesty, was held
jure coronœ.
511
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
ARMY ESTIMATES.]—
Lord Palmerston
having moved the order of the day for going into a committee of Supply,
Mr. Creevey
said, he was anxious to offer a few words, before they went into a committee for the purpose of voting away more than six millions of money, in a House certainly the thinnest that he had seen this session. And first, he begged to remind the House of a few facts, which really it at present appeared to have no notion of; namely, that the country was at that moment afflicted with a great and overwhelming calamity, called agricultural distress: that thousands upon thousands, under the pressure of this evil, were daily falling from comparative opulence to beggary and ruin; that an actual revolution was going on among a very great and numerous body in this country. He begged to remind the House also, that from every county of England the petitions of the people had been repeatedly presented to parliament, for the adoption of measures of retrenchment and economy; that they had been urging the necessity of a reduction of salaries of all kinds, that had been augmented during the late depreciation of the currency; and that they bad, been calling for the abolition of all useless offices. Nothing could be of a more serious nature than these requests and petitions; and no time more fitting for their consideration than when the House were going, in a committee of supply, to vote away six millions for the supply of the army; more especially if they recurred to the amount of the army estimates in 1792, and contrasted with it this estimate, to which there would be to be added, no doubt, for army extraordinaries about one million more. It was quite impossible to suppose, that great reductions might not be effected in this, as well as in all other departments of the public expenditure, or that government could not effect considerable reductions in all salaries, the amount of which had been augmented during the late depreciation of our currency. He knew very well that government had done so, with respect to the lower order of officers; namely, the unfortunate clerks, whose salaries they had cut down: but the sinecures, and
512
l.
s.
d.
l.;
Sir T. Lethbridge
concurred in the general principle of the resolution; although he could not go the length of supposing, that the military estimates could be reduced, consistently with the honour and safety of the country, to the standard of 1792. He thought the reduction made in the salaries of public men during the last session, was by no means sufficient. They appeared to him to be remunerated beyond what the country could well spare. Every measure of reduction and economy should be adopted, that could be resorted to with safety.
513
Lord Palmerston
thought, that if the hon. mover had any objections to urge against the estimates, it would be more consistent with the usages of the House to discuss them in the committee.
Mr. Jones
denied that, with a military establishment, reduced below what it now was, we could keep the colonies which we had conquered in the last war. As to the public officers, he thought them rather underpaid than overpaid. He likewise contended, that reduction and economy had been carried as far as was consistent with the honour and safety of the country.
Mr. Hume
contended, that a more correct and proper resolution had never been proposed to the House. The six millions which they were now called upon to vote for the army, did not contain all the items of expenditure. There was one million for the extraordinaries, half a million for the yeomanry, and a great expenditure for the commissariat and barrack department. He had expected to find a much larger reduction in the estimates than had absolutely taken place, now that the government had changed its policy, and withdrawn itself from the holy alliance.
The amendment was negatived without a division. The House having resolved itself into the Committee, to which the Army Estimates were referred,
Lord Palmerston
said, it was not his intention to occupy much of the attention of the House, because the difference between the estimates of this year and those of the last was very trifling. The amount of force had not been varied, except by a small addition of two companies in the West Indies; and the amount of charge was 18,000
l.
l.
l.
l,
l.
514
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Hume
did not think that, under the present circumstances of the country, the number of troops embodied was too great. He objected, however, to the number of foot-guards and cavalry, which now amounted to 14,000 men. Any person, who looked at the state of this species of force in 1792, must be astonished at its amazing increase.
Mr. Denman
said, it appeared to him, that all the votes on which the committee was likely to be engaged that evening,
515
516
517
Mr. H. Sumner
did not believe that the learned gentleman expressed the feelings of the majority of this country, when he advocated the propriety of our interfering in the approaching war. The learned gentleman had stigmatized as mad, the conduct of France in attacking Spain. He would allow it to be mad; but he asserted, that this
518
Sir W. de Crespigny
also advocated the propriety of our observing a strict neutrality.
The resolution was agreed to. On the resolution, "That 1,841,658
l.
s.
d.
Mr. Hume
objected to the charge for the recruiting service, which was 46,000
l.
l.
Lord Palmerston
said, that from the charge for the recruiting service was to be deducted 14,000
l.
519
Mr. Hume
complained, that no less than five clerks and a paymaster were employed at Chatham to pay a few hundred men. He also complained of the large expense of the riding establishment; to him it appeared utterly useless.
Lord Palmerston
said, that the five clerks and the paymaster were necessary, in consequence of the complicated nature of the accounts. As to the riding establishment, no part of our military system was more valuable. It was extremely important, that the system of riding throughout the army should be uniform. Even if that establishment were broken up, the pay of the officers employed in it would remain.
Captain O'Grady
could not see why those who had received instructions in the riding establishment could not communicate their knowledge to the regiments to which they belonged, unless they were like dancing dogs, who were capable of being taught, but incapable of teaching. There was not the slightest ground for keeping up this establishment.
Mr. Bernal
said, the establishment had existed for so great a length of time, that the whole body of our cavalry must be sufficiently instructed. It would be very satisfactory, if the noble lord would give any intimation, when, in his opinion, the establishment might cease without detriment to the public service.
Lord Palmerston
said, it was not sufficient to teach one or two individuals of a regiment, in order that they might communicate their knowledge to others. Unless the roughriders were constantly kept up to a certain point of discipline, the regiments soon relapsed into their old habits. He should propose the maintenance of the establishment, as long as it appeared to him to be essential to the public service. Whenever it ceased to be so, he would propose its reduction.
The resolution was agreed to. On the resolution, "That 134,000
l.
Mr. Hume
thought that these corps ought to have public spirit enough to serve without any allowance; especially
520
Lord Palmerston
thought that 3
l.
Sir T. Lethbridge
bore testimony to the valuable services rendered by this constitutional force.
Mr. F. Palmer
thought there would be less objection to the yeomanry corps, if they served, as formerly, without any expense to the country. As to the usefulness of the force, he must venture to doubt. He had, some time ago, gone to a review of what was considered quite a crack corps: be alluded to the Buckinghamshire corps. Their discipline was admired, and they were considered as being altogether well equipped. They were mounted, however, not very advantageously. One man rode a pony, while the next to him rode a horse of 16 hands high. The horses were of all sizes. He left the House to judge what sort of a charge could be expected from such a body of troops. Many of the members of these corps enlisted to save the horse-tax.
Mr. J. Bench
defended the Wiltshire yeomanry, among whom there was not a member who did not ride his own horse. He approved of the grant, because the yeomanry corps were a constitutional force. If any thing would justify the reduction of the regular army, it was the efficiency of these regiments, which were never used as a political engine against the people, and had been most useful in quelling civil riots. Because he disliked the existence of a regular standing army, he approved of an efficient yeomanry force, which was composed, in the essential import of the words, of the people of England.
Mr. Freemantle,
as commanding officer of a regiment of the Bucks yeomanry, could not sit still and hear that regiment treated so slightingly. He would maintain, that a corps was never turned out in more perfect discipline. He thought the country was not very grievously taxed in paying 3
l.
The resolution, together with the rest of the resolutions, were then agreed to. The House resumed, and the report was ordered to be received on Monday.
521
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, March 10, 1823.
ARMY ESTIMATES.]
On the order of the day for bringing up the Report of the Committee on the Army Estimates,
Mr. Hume
said, he wished to offer a few observations before the report was received. It would be remembered, that his majesty, in the late speech from the throne, when speaking of the estimates for the current year, had said, that they were prepared with every attention to economy, and that the total expenditure would be found materially below that for the last year. Experience had taught him to place little confidence in the promises held out in these speeches from the throne; and, upon the present occasion, a comparison of the proposed estimates with those of last year, justified his suspicions. The army estimates for last year amounted to 6,103,068
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
Colonel Davies
said, that if he did not at present offer any opposition to the amount of an estimate which, under ordinary circumstances, he should think excessive, it was because he feared that war was almost inevitable, not merely between
522
Lord Palmerston
said, it might be very proper for the House to express an opinion upon this subject, when it should have seen all the estimates; but before it had seen the charges for all the different heads of service, he thought that the expression of such an opinion would be at least premature. Last session he had informed the House, that, should the same establishments be kept up as was then provided for, the charge for the present year would be increased on various accounts, by 50,000
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
Mr. Grey Bennet
said, he thought the present establishment totally disproportionate to the state of the country. If affairs on the continent of Europe should experience a favourable change, he would bring forward a motion for the reduction of that establishment.
l.
s.
d.
Mr. Hume
wished to know whether there was any chance that the business of the arrear department of the noble lord's office would ever be settled? The promise held out in the first instance was, that a very short space of time would suffice for the completion of that business, Cases of peculiar hardship had arisen out of this institution. Officers, whose accounts were disputed, had been obliged to remain for years without pay, and, it; some cases, to refund, after extraordinary lapses of time, sums, of their liability to pay which they could have formed no conception. He thought it was not right to allow the accounts of individuals to run on for five and twenty years, and then to call on them, or their representatives, to make good deficiencies. He entreated the noble lord to put an end to this establishment, which cost the country 15,000
l.
Mr. T. Wilson
heartily concurred in the remarks of the hon. gentleman. Cases
523
Lord Palmerston
said, he perfectly concurred in what had been said, as to the hardship of many of the cases, and had felt himself at liberty to relax very considerably that rigour which be would always apply to the examination of recent accounts. When, however, it did appear on the face of an officer's accounts, that he had received a sum of money which he did not account for, he (lord P.) could not think it a hard proceeding to call on such an individual for his balance. From 122 accounts of agents, and 943 accounts of paymasters, there had been struck off the sum of 45,245
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
d.
Mr. Hume
observed, that the act for keeping up the volunteer corps in Ireland would expire in April. He wished the House to consider how far it might be desirable not to renew it. When originally embodied, they consisted of Catholics and Protestants indiscriminately, and that they had been of great use nobody could deny. But, in the lapse of time, various abuses had crept into those corps, by which they had been rendered no longer equal to the duties which they formerly performed. Instead of being serviceable in maintaining the public peace, they had lately been the cause of more public disturbances than any other set of men. The right hon. secretary (Mr. Peel) had admitted, on a former evening, that the greater part of the yeomanry in the north of Ireland were Orangemen. He had also expressed his disapprobation of secret oaths. Now, if the right hon. secretary brought in his bill to prevent such secret oaths from being administered in Ireland, in what situation would he find himself as to the Orangemen, who formed so large a part of these volunteer corps? Was it possible for him to undo oaths already taken? Was it fitting that
524
l.
s.
d.
Sir John Brydges
said, he did not know the source whence the hon. member had derived his information, but
525
Sir George Hill
said, he could not have anticipated that he should have had to express obligation on any subject to the member for Aberdeen, yet he now offered him his thanks for having given him an opportunity of refuting the acrimonious, malignant, and unfounded aspersions which he had cast upon the yeomanry corps of Ireland, and particularly against the Londonderry yeomanry, which the hon. member had ventured to assert were raised for the purposes of disturbance. Now, he desired he would state from what source he had presumed to make such an assertion.
Mr. Bennet
intimated that Mr. Hume had not used the expression.
Sir G. Hill
resumed. He maintained, that when any hon. member aspersed a body of men who had performed such signal services to their country, it was his duty to give up the source of his offensive statements. He suspected he knew the source from whence they came. He utterly denied that such a qualification was required for becoming a member of a yeomanry corps as that he should have previously entered into the Orange association. The oath of allegiance in Ireland, as in England, was the only measure of qualification required; and if such corps were considered essential to the peace of this country, how much more necessary must they be to the preservation of the peace of Ireland. It had been stated, and truly stated, on an important occasion November last, that in three provinces out of four in Ireland,
526
527
528
Mr. Spring Rice
said, he was as strongly opposed as any man could be to the principles upon which the Orange societies were founded; but he knew that they comprised among their members some of the most honourable men in the country, whose power of utility was only cramped by their party ties. That observation applied both to the sworn Orangemen and to those who, like the right hon. baronet, had taken the infection in the natural way. That right hon. baronet seemed to think, that the oath was the only objectionable circumstance connected with the Orange associations. He disclaimed the oath, but he declared that he would cherish the spirit of Orangeism. The right hon. baronet must know, that it was not the oath alone which rendered those societies bad. The ceremony of
529
l.
Mr. Dawson,
said, his hon. friend was incorrect in stating, that the police establishments introduced Orangeism into the south of Ireland. As a proof of the contrary, the following lines had been, for ages, inscribed on the gates of Bandon:—
"Turk, Jew, or Atheist
May enter here, but not a Papist."
530
Sir J. Newport
said, he had always been of opinion, that that kind of local force which might be so desirable for the protection of England, was not the best calculated for the preservation of the peace in Ireland; because there would be carried into it all those prejudices and party feelings, the effect of which it ought to be the object of such force to repress.
Mr. Plunkett
regretted that any thing should have passed calculated to disturb that conciliatory spirit in which the House had been left, upon this subject, at the conclusion of a former debate. He had asked, whether certain facts had not come officially before him, showing that the yeomanry corps in Ireland had, in many instances, contributed to disturb the public peace? He distinctly answered, that no such instances had come before him, and he did not believe the fact. He felt it his duty to say, that, generally speaking, no such complaints had been preferred against them; and that they had been found extremely useful in preserving the peace of the country. At the same time, he could not but regret that so few Homan Catholics were enrolled in that body; and he regretted to hear it asserted, that that fact was to be attributed to their own fault. He remembered well the first establishment of those corps in Ireland. He had the honour of being amongst the first by whom their institution had been suggested. The suggestion was made at his house, in the year 1796; and an offer was made to the government by the profession to which he belonged, of their services. But he would state, as a fact, that the rebellion, to put down which this aid had been offered, was hatched and planned and carried on at that
531
Mr. Goulburn
insisted, that the services of the Irish yeomanry corps had been productive of the greatest benefits. Was it right, then, to disband them in the summary manner that was now proposed?
General Hart
bore testimony to the good conduct of the yeomanry corps, and denied that the Catholics were excluded from them.
Mr. Abercromby
contended, that the amendment did not go the length of dis-
532
Mr. Secretary Peel
objected to the amendment, both on the ground of conciliation and of economy, and regretted that it had been brought forward. The hon. gentleman had been grossly imposed upon. The person who had informed the hon. gentleman, could only have had mischief in view. If the motion were not withdrawn, he trusted it would be rejected by a signal majority.
Mr. Bennet
supported the amendment, as tending to promote union in Ireland, and break down that system of exclusion which was in existence.
Mr. Hume
then withdrew his amendment.
ASSESSED TAXES REDUCTION BILL.]—
On the order of the day for going into a Committee on this bill,
Mr. Curwen
complained of the tax on houses rated under 5
l.
l.,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
thought, that the case stated by the hon. member was greatly exaggerated. It was true, that all houses rated at 5
l.
Mr. Bright
thought it very advisable to take off the house and window tax from the poorer classes. It was a tax very grievous in its operation on those classes, and felt most in the close and unhealthy quarters of great towns. The
533
Mr. Wetherell
said, he had a representation to make on behalf of the learned body whom he had the honour to represent. Some of the members of the colleges kept horses, and, whereas one groom was frequently enough for ten horses, by a sort of financial arithmetic, this solitary groom was multiplied into as many grooms as there were horses. It would be no very rational method of computation, to say, that because one cook or one butler could serve a hundred guests, therefore each guest ought to pay for one cook and one butler. This tax did not, in point of fact, fall upon the graduates, because those persons kept their horses without the college. It was not so much for its amount, as for the principle which it involved, that he wished to see it repealed.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
did not think there was the slightest foundation for the application. His hon. and learned friend had made some facetious allusion to the college cook and butler. Every one knew that there were such officers; but he had never yet heard of a college groom. If there were ten horses, and only one groom, it was clear, that the horses must be very ill groomed; but that was no reason why each of the persons who employed a groom, should not pay the tax, as well as those whose horses were more efficiently attended to.
Mr. Curwen
hoped the chancellor of the exchequer would consent to place English cottagers on the same footing as
534
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
had no objection to accede to the wish of the hon. member, but feared the measure would not be productive of much benefit.
The House then resumed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, March 11, 1823.
NATIONAL DEBT REDUCTION BILL.]—
On the order of the day for going into a committee on this bill,
Mr. Grenfell
said, he wished to call the attention of the House to the subject of the sinking fund. In the first place, he would address his observations to that part of the subject which had been justly designated as the sham sinking fund. He hoped that the system which was abolished in 1819 would never be renewed; but he was afraid, that the indirect favour which the hon. member for Taunton had shown it, might tend to its revival. He would describe the operation of the sham sinking fund. It would be recollected that, in the original act of 1786, Mr. Fox had introduced a clause, the object of which was to allow the commissioners for the reduction of the national debt to apply the whole or part of the sinking fund money to the subscription for any loans. This he considered a most wise and provident clause; but, unfortunately, from the year 1793 to 1819, ministers had not acted upon that clause, but instead of that, had induced the House to believe, that it would be for the advantage of the in exchange for the money obtained from the loan contractors, they gave an article called three percents, and then sent commissioners and brokers into the market, who invested that identical money so received in the purchase of 3 percent stock. Such was the advantageous plan on which ministers had acted! He had addressed the House in 1814 on the subject, with the view of inducing the chancellor of the exchequer to change his plan, and in 1819, the system were innoxious, he would not quarrel with it; but it was capable of demonstration, that it had cost the country, during the four last loaus of the late war, a sum equal to a perpetual annuity of 268,000
l.
l.
535
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
536
Mr. John Smith
thought it would be readily admitted, that, in the course of the long war in which we had been engaged, great difficulties had been sometimes experienced by the government in raising money upon the public securities. Now, whenever loans were to be borrowed, the greater the facilities of borrowing, the better were the terms. So far, although the sinking fund might have failed to be effectual in the discharge of debt, it would be granted that it had been very efficient. He was convinced, that, without the services of the sinking fund, this country could not have gone on for two years longer in its system of raising money He would give the bill his warmest approbation.
Sir H. Parnell,
while he admitted the accuracy of the statements of the hon. member for Portarlington (Mr. Ricardo), on former discussions respecting the old sinking fund, could not agree with him in his conclusion, that there ought not to be any new sinking fund. The objections which he had to this measure might be removed by placing it on a better principle. The danger of a new sinking fund being misapplied by ministers, as the last one had been, might be obviated by giving it effect through the medium of long annuities, determinable in a fixed number of years. If one per cent was given to the holders of perpetual annuities for transferring their annuities for ever into annuities for years, each million of sinking fund per annum would extinguish 100 millions of debt. if the 3 per cents were at 80, one per cent applied in this way would pay 100
l.
537
538
Mr. Ricardo
highly approved of his hon. friend's plan, which, by taking the sinking fund out of the hands of ministers, would do away his great objection to it; namely, its liability to be perverted from the purpose for which it was originally intended. His hon. friend's proposition of converting what were at present permanent into determinable annuities, appeared to him to be deserving the serious attention of the House; and he must say, that he did not think his hon. friend did justice to his own plan, in stating, that it would liquidate the existing debt in 45 years; for the calculation on which he had proceeded was made when the 3 per cents were only at 80. The House might easily conceive how beneficially public credit would be affected, if a real sinking fund were thus continually operating over the whole extent of the debt. From the adoption of such a plan, ministers, in the event of any occurrence requiring an increased expenditure, would not, as heretofore, be enabled to despoil a fund, which ought to be sacredly appropriated to another purpose; but must come down to parliament, and otherwise provide for the public exigencies. While he was on his legs, he would say a few words on what an hon. friend had been pleased to call his "crotchet" for reducing the national debt by a general contribution of capital. His (Mr. R.'s) proposition would merely carry further the principle of the income tax. His hon. friend was quite deceived, if he supposed that he ever contemplated the possibility of effecting the object he had described at once. On the contrary, the operation might be extended by numerous instalments over a period of two, three, six, or twelve months. And when the immense benefits which would result from its adoption were considered, he could not think it so Utopian a scheme
539
Mr. Monck
thought the best way would be, to abolish the sinking fund, and apply the surplus revenue to the remission of taxes.
Mr. J. Martin
said, it would not be in the power of ministers to lay their hands upon any sinking fund which might be established, without the concurrence of parliament.
Mr. Hume
said, they had had ample experience of the readiness with which the House assented to any proposal of ministers to interfere with the sinking fund. They had already voted away 324,000,000
l.
The House having resolved itself into a committee, Mr. Hume moved, that, instead of fixing the sinking fund at five millions, it should consist of any surplus of revenue beyond expenditure, not exceeding five millions. Upon this, the committee divided: Ayes, 7; Noes, 55. The other clauses of the bill were agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 13, 1823.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.]
Mr. Curteis,
on presenting a petition from Hadleigh, respecting the Agricultural Distress, expressed a wish, that an hon. baronet who had given notice of a motion for the 20th instant, on the subject, would postpone it, as many members who were favourable to the motion would be absent from town.
Sir T. Lethbridge
said, the resolutions which he meant to move were of such great importance to the empire generally, that he should be sorry if a single day were lost in bringing before the House and the country the exact state of the landed interest. Having received the most decided assurance from ministers, that it was not their intention to originate any measures, having for their object the relief of so large a class of society, he could not, consistently with his ideas of duty, consent to put off his motion, even for one day beyond the time already specified. He was determined to persevere.
Ordered to lie on the table.
540
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' BILL.]—
Several petitions were presented for the repeal of the Insolvent Debtors' act.
Mr. S. Wortley
said, that as the act of last year had produced no good effect, he was entitled to ask, whether government had any intention to bring in another measure?
Sir E. Knatchbull
said, that complaints against the existing law were heard in every part of the country.
The Solicitor-General
said, he could not think of abandoning the principle of the measure; but he would listen with attention to any suggestion that might be thrown out. There was one point in which it was, perhaps, possible to make an improvement: he alluded to the case of persons who caused themselves to be collusively arrested, in order to take the benefit of the act. Perhaps it would be proper to introduce a clause into the bill, to prevent such persons from taking the benefit of the act. He did not, however, think that any great good could result from such an alteration. The individual who contrived to get deeply in debt, if not arrested by a friend, was certain of being arrested by a real creditor. Let it not be supposed, because frauds were committed under this act, that those whose business it was to watch over measures of that nature, had neglected their duty.
Mr. Bright
was very sorry to hear that the learned gentleman despaired of making any great improvement in the measure. What he and others complained of was, that no return of assets had yet been made. It appeared that the expenses of the court swallowed up all the debtor's property. If the act could not be amended, it was better that there should be no permanent law on the subject; for, as it now stood, the fraudulent had a manifest advantage over the honest debtor.
Sir M. W. Ridley
said, he should be extremely sorry to abandon the principle on which the law stood; but there were many provisions, by the introduction of which the situation of the creditor might be greatly ameliorated. The fraudulent debtor had, at present, too many facilities for the disposal of his property.
Mr. Grey Bennet
complained, that, with respect to all questions which affected the morals, the honour, and the character of the people, ministers remained perfectly inactive. When an alteration was called for in the Insolvent Debtors'
541
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that the general charges which the hon. member had made against government he would meet with as general a denial. If the hon. member inquired how ministers were occupied from morning till night, he would not have hazarded his charge of apathy and supineness. The attorney-general had last session introduced a bill for the amendment of the Insolvent Debtors' act; and surely that learned gentleman should not be called on to sacrifice a principle of which he approved, for the purpose of adopting any view which the hon. member might entertain. The solicitor-general had just stated, that he would listen to any suggestion that might be thrown out. Was it possible for any man to go farther? As to the game laws, the hon. member for Yorkshire had expressed a wish that an inquiry into those laws should take place. And what answer had he received? that to such an inquiry he (Mr. Peel) would not only not object, but would lend his best assistance.
GAME LAWS.]—
Lord Cranborne
rose to bring forward his motion for the appointment of a select committee to take into consideration the game laws. As the object of it was solely to acquire information respecting the operation of those laws, he trusted it would encounter no opposition. His own opinion of their tendency to deteriorate the morals and deprave the habits of the lower classes, had been unhappily strengthened by the number of committals for violations of their provisions during the past year. They had amounted to 1,467, of which 372 had taken place in the last month of the year. He would move, "That a Select Committee be appointed to take into consideration the Laws relating to Game, and report their Observations thereupon to the House."
Sir J. Sebright
implored the House to take the subject into their most serious consideration. He conjured them to do so, not upon any speculative opinion of his own; but upon his actual knowledge,
542
Sir J. Shelley
was of opinion, that the demoralization of the lower agricultural classes was not so much owing to the game laws, as to the distress which prevailed among them, and the difficulty of their procuring adequate subsistence.
Mr. Curwen
thought, that to the existence of these odious laws a vast proportion of the offences which came before the judges at the assizes was to be attributed. Perhaps the only mode of altogether doing away with poaching, would be to suffer game to come legally into the market. This, he thought, might be permitted, without too much encroaching on the pleasures of gentlemen who resided in the country. The effect of the game laws was to cast an odium on every gentleman who endeavoured to protect the game on his estate.
Mr. Gipps
was anxious to have a return of the number of convictions under the game laws for some years past. By such a return, it would be seen whether the amount was connected with the pressure of agricultural distress. He was persuaded that latterly these convictions had decreased.
Mr. Secretary Peel
did not think that the committals under the game laws had been at all increased by the distress of agriculture. He agreed, however, that it was desirable to have correct accounts of the number of committals in each year; but even should it appear that the number had materially diminished, that would not, in his opinion, be an argument, against the appointment of a committee. He by no means pledged himself to the
543
Mr. N. Colburne
was persuaded, that the peace and happiness of the lower classes were materially affected by the game laws. At the same time, he thought that legalising the sale of game would have a tendency to increase, rather than to diminish the evil.
Colonel Wood
was glad to see a more liberal feeling pervade the House, than when the same subject was last before them. He thought the thanks of the country were due to his noble friend for calling their attention to this important subject.
The motion was agreed to.
NATIONAL DEBT REDUCTION BILL.]—
The report of this bill was brought up. On the question, that the Amendments be read a second time,
Mr. Tierney
rose, not to oppose the motion, but in consequence of his wish distinctly to understand what it was that the House were now called upon to pass. He wished to know what was the exact bearing of the present bill. It professed to be framed on the resolution of the House, of the 8th June, 1819, that for the better maintenance of the public credit, by the progressive reduction of the national debt, it was necessary that there should be a clear surplus of the income of the country, beyond the expenditure of 5,000,000
l.
544
545
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he would state, as distinctly as he could, how it was that he considered himself entitled to assume, that there was an actual surplus of five millions, applicable to the reduction of the debt. He took it, that after the repeal of the 2,200,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
546
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
l.
bonâ fide
l.
l.
l.
547
l.
l.
Mr. Hume
said, that the resolution of June, 1819, which declared, "that it was absolutely necessary there should be a clear surplus of the income of the country beyond the expenditure of not less than 5,000,000
l.
l.
l.
548
l.
l.
l.
l.,
Colonel Davies
thought that the plan was peculiarly ill-advised at the present moment, when the continent was about to be convulsed by a war, in which, he believed, we could not avoid taking a part. He suggested, that a considerable reduction of the amount of debt might be effected, by converting the 3, the 3½, and the 4 per cent stocks into a 5 per cent stock, not redeemable for a certain number of years.
Sir H. Parnell
wished to have a clause inserted in the bill, to enable the commissioners of the sinking fund to grant annuities for years, to such persons as might propose to transfer into a stock of this description, 3 per cent or other stocks now vested in annuities for ever. He recommended this mode of applying a sinking fund as preferable to the plan provided by the bill; because it would place it out of the reach of the government, and thus secure its being applied to the intended purpose of redeeming the national debt; for if the sinking fund were thus arranged, it would be absorbed in the annuity, and would not be available for any other object. The following was the way in which it would operate in redeeming debt. Supposing 3 per cent stock to be at 75
l.
l.
l.
l.
549
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
550
l.
Mr. Maberly
could not see how the right hon. gentleman could object to the amendment; for it was clear, that if they supported a sinking fund greater than the actual surplus of revenue, it could only be done by increasing the unfunded debt.
Sir F. Blake
considered the sinking fund, as far as regarded the extinction of the national debt, a mere fallacy. Its operation might be compared to the taking of a bucket of water from a great reservoir which was abundantly supplied from the fountain-head. The country had gone on paying off, as it was called, the national debt for a number of years, and what had been the result? The debt had been augmented to four times its original amount. The new chancellor of the exchequer had come down to the House to make them a present of a new sinking fund; but the new sinking fund was grafted on the parent stock, and possessed all the faults of its original. The new chancellor of the exchequer had boasted of the benefits that would result from his scheme; but, "timeo Danaos, et dona ferentes." The right hon. gentleman said, that he had a sinking; fund of 5,000,000
l.
l.
l.
On the question, "That the said words be inserted," the House divided: Ayes, 38; Noes, 82.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Blake, sir F.
Althorp, visc.
Boughey, sir J.
Barratt, S. M.
Browne, Dom.
Bernal, R.
Burdett, sir F.
551
Cradock, S.
Newport, sir J.
Curwen, J. C.
Normanby, visc.
Davies, T.
Pelham, J. C.
Foley, J. H. H.
Price, R.
Griffith, J. W.
Poyntz, W. S.
Haldimand, W.
Ricardo, D.
Heathcote, J. G.
Robinson, sir G.
Hughes, W. L.
Rumbold, sir E.
James, W.
Shelley, sir J.
Jervoise, G. P.
Tierney, right hon. G.
Lethbridge, sir T.
Wharton, J.
Leycester, R.
Wood, alderman
Lushington, S.
Wyvill, M.
Maberly, John
Maberly, W. L.
TELLERS.
Monck, J. B.
Hume, J.
Moore, P.
Ellice, E.
MERCHANT VESSELS APPRENTICESHIP
The House having resolved itself into a Committee on the act of the 37th Geo. 3, c. 73, for regulating the number of apprentices to be taken on board British Merchant Vessels,
Mr. Huskisson
observed, that great inconveniencies had arisen in the merchant service, from the existing regulations respecting apprentices. In some vessels, particularly those in the West India trade, a certain number of apprentices were required to be taken; while in the vessels in other trades no such obligation existed. Now, this might be an advantage or a disadvantage, according to circumstance. In peace, it would be a disadvantage to be obliged to have a certain number of apprentices, when for nearly the same expense the same number, of able seamen might be had. In war, it would be an advantage, when able seamen were difficult to be got. One object of his bill would be to make the advantages equal in all merchant ships; and this he proposed to effect by a clause, that every merchant vessel in every trade should have an equal number of apprentices, in proportion to her tonnage. He also proposed to give to apprentices greater protection against impressment. At present those of 17 years of age were liable to be impressed after three years service. He proposed that apprentices should not be liable to be impressed under the age of 21. Another subject which called for the interference of the House was, the desertion of apprentices from merchant ships. It was a common practice to give to seamen on outward bound voyages, two or three months wages' in advance, with the understanding that they were engaged to the ship out and home. In cases of desertion at fo-
552
Mr. Bernal
was glad to see the subject taken up by the right hon. gentleman. He would suggest to him the propriety of taking into consideration the whole state of our laws regarding merchant seamen, and of forming out of them one clear and consistent code. By so doing, he would confer an essential benefit on the shipping, interest of the country.
Mr. T. Wilson
said, that the protection which this bill would give to apprentices until they reached the age of 21, would create for the country a nursery of active and able seamen at the least possible expense.
Mr. Hume
hoped the right hon. gentleman would not hurry the bill through the House, on account of its vast importance.
Mr. Huskisson
said, that the measure had the support of the shipping interest.
Mr. Ricardo
wished to know whether the sailors were friendly to the measure. He had no doubt that their employers were so; because they would be enabled to lower the rate of wages by increasing the number of apprentices. He thought the navy would not receive that benefit from it, which seemed to be anticipated. Our sailors would seek employment in the merchant service of other countries, if the rate of wages was unduly lowered in their own. Should that be the case, where would gentlemen find that nursery for the navy, of which they now talked so largely?
The motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, March 14, 1823.
MUTINY BILL.]—
Lord Palmerston
moved the order of the day for going into a committee on this bill. On the ques-
553
Colonel Davies
said, that in rising to move an instruction to the committee to insert a clause in the bill to prevent, in future, the dismissal of officers of the army without trial by a court-martial, or the increasing the severity of any punishment awarded by the sentence of such court; he might, perhaps, in consideration of the difficulty of the subject, be pardoned, were he to intreat the indulgence of the House. But as he had voluntarily undertaken the task, as neither official duties nor imperative circumstances had forced it upon him, he was aware that he had no claim to any thing beyond a patient and a candid hearing. He should have, at the outset, to combat strongly formed opinions, not only on the part of those who might be considered his political opponents, but were among that number on whose support, upon ordinary occasions, he might confidently rely. In opposition to any arguments he could use, would be urged long established custom, an uninterrupted prescription of a century and a half; and he should be held up to reprobation as a daring innovator, whose councils, if followed, would make a breach in the just prerogatives of the crown, and tend to subvert the discipline of the army.
554
555
556
557
per se,
558
pro re natâ,
559
in terrorem,
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
Lord Palmerston,
in stating the grounds upon which he should feel it his duty to oppose this motion, did not mean to follow the example of the hon. gentleman, in producing a number of authorities, drawn from various authors, who had taken, possibly, a partial view of the subject, or had judged erroneously on a matter which did not fall within the course of their ordinary discussions. If he could not produce an argument sufficiently strong in itself to carry conviction to the mind of the House, he would not attempt to bolster it up with quotations and authority. The ground of his opposition would he, that the principle of this proposition involved a direct breach of an important prerogative, which the crown had possessed from the earliest periods; and which it was most essential for its own splendor and for the interests of the people, that it should continue to retain. He was one of those who considered that the prerogatives of the crown were not given to it for the peculiar advantage, or dignity, or interest, of the individual who might happen to wear the crown; but for the interest and the benefit of the people. It was not requisite that he should go into any long historical research to prove that this was a prerogative of a most ancient character; for he had only to refer the House to the statute book of the realm. He need only refer them to the statute passed in the beginning of the reign of
567
568
569
570
Mr. Hutchinson
maintained, that the power of dismissing officers without previously bringing them to trial, was a prerogative which the king ought not to possess. He believed that the late emperor of France, and he was certain that the present king of that country did not possess that power. There had been instances recently of distinguished French officers being tried for state offences, and yet retaining their rank. The king of France could refrain from employing military officers, but he could not dismiss them. That could only be done by the sentence of a court-martial. He believed that not even the most despotic governments possessed the power which was said to be vested in the crown of England. He agreed with the noble lord, that the prerogative which was claimed for the king of England ought to be, and generally was, exercised for the interests of the people, and in support of the dignity of the crown: but, there were instances in which great injustice would have been prevented, if officers had been afforded an opportunity of defending themselves before a court-martial. The case of his dear and valued friend (sir R. Wilson) was one of those instances. If that distinguished officer, covered as he was with the honourable rewards which he had earned in so many bloody contests, had been tried
571
Mr. H. Gurney
was of opinion, that the king's prerogative of dismissing officers from his service was a very necessary one; and lamented that the hon. colonel, in his zeal for the liberties of Englishmen, had not rather turned his attention to the position of the privates, under the existing system of martial law and life enlistment, than to a few possible cases of very inferior hardship.
Mr. Hume
observed, that the hon. member who spoke last had said, that he thought the king ought to possess the power of dismissing his own officers. Now, he would maintain, that the army was not the servant of the king, but of the state, and that the king was only required, as chief magistrate of the state, to administer justice to it. There was a wide distinction between the power which the king possessed of dismissing his own servants, and that which was claimed for him of dismissing military and naval officers. The noble lord commenced by admitting, that the foundation of all prerogative was utility; but he had failed to show wherein consisted the utility of the particular prerogative in question. The acts to which the noble lord had alluded, were passed at a period when the kingly prerogatives were the subject of dispute between the crown and the people. Since that time many of the prerogatives of the
572
Mr. Wynn
said, that he had now, for the first time, heard it asserted in that House or elsewhere, that the king of Eng-
573
Lord Hotham
was of opinion, that a prerogative which had been exercised for so long a period, must have some foundation in law. The only objection which he should notice was, that there was danger to the constitution in the assumption of this prerogative. He had frequently heard fears of danger to the constitution, expressed on the opposition side of the House; but, as it appeared to him, the only danger to the constitution, connected with the subject, would arise from the motion of the gallant member, if carried in the affirmative; for he confessed, he could not see a greater source of danger than an army independent of the crown. It had been said, that officers of the army ought to enjoy the same privileges as other subjects. Now, he had spent a great part of his life in the army, and no man could be more anxious than he was for the welfare of the service; but he could not consent to give to it the privilege now sought for; because he thought it would be of no advantage to the officers individually, but would be most dangerous to the country.
Sir F. Blake
could not consent to the motion, but thought that, in cases of dismissal of the nature alluded to, some compensation ought to be given to officers. For his own part, in a corps which he had the honour commanding,
574
The amendment was negatived. The House having resolved itself into the committee,
Colonel Davies
proceeded to reply to the observations of the noble lord made in the former stage of the bill. He contended, that the 13th and 14th of Charles 2nd had nothing to do with the question. If the crown possessed this mighty prerogative, what was the use of passing the Mutiny bill in such a hurry, or what was the use of passing it at all?
Mr. Wynn
considered it irregular for any member to reply directly, in one stage of a bill, to the observations of another member, made in a former stage.
The Chairman
said, it was not strictly regular to reply to a speech made in a former stage; but he thought the hon. member had a clear right to go again into arguments on the general measure.
Colonel Davies
resumed, and went on to contend, that, by the 37th section of the bill, it was laid down that all officers must be tried by a court-martial for any offence imputed to them, and that dismissal by the crown without such trial was against the spirit and letter of the act referred to.
Lord Palmerston
maintained, that the act Charles 2nd did not confer the prerogative on the crown, but recognized it as pre-existing. The hon. member had asked why press this bill, if the crown had so extensive a prerogative? To this he would reply, that it was necessary, for the sake of discipline, to have a summary mode of punishing offences committed by officers of the army. If the crown did not possess the power of dismissing without a court-martial, then no new enactment was necessary; but such was not the true construction of the 37th section. It said, that it should be lawful for a court-martial to try for certain offences; but it did not interfere with the power of the crown to dismiss without trial. There were many cases, not breaches of the articles of war, which would not only warrant, but require a dismissal without trial. How, for instance, could a man be tried for want of talent?
The bill then went through committee.
575
NAVY ESTIMATES.]—
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, to which the Navy Estimates were referred,
Sir John Osborn
said, he would submit certain items to the consideration of the committee. These were for the wages of labourers and artificers employed in the dock-yards; next, for the charge of timber and other materials for the building of ships, the charge for pilotage and other contingencies: under this head there was a considerable reduction, which was to be attributed, in a great degree, to the improved and effective state of the navy, and to the prudent reductions that had been made in the different dock-yards. Under the second head, there was also a considerable diminution; there were considerable reductions in the half-pay, and in the widows' pensions; there was, however, an additional charge of 310,000
l.
l.
s.
d.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
s.
d.,
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
Mr. Hume
said, he understood that the state of the navy now, was not better than it had been three years ago. All the reductions that had been made this year might have been made seven years ago; but, better late than never. The
576
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
Sir G. Clerk
said, it was a great mistake to suppose, that the office of paymaster of marines could be abolished with advantage. If the business were transferred to the office of the treasurer of the navy, it would be necessary to appoint a cashier with a considerable salary; so that there would be no saving. It was not alone in making payments that this officer was employed, as the whole of the barracks of the marine corps were under his control. The correspondence which this officer had to keep up, was quite sufficient to employ him and the six clerks. As for the paymaster of widows' pensions, and the secretary to the widows'
577
Mr. Hume
said, that the treasurer of the navy was once the paymaster of the widows' pensions. He was of opinion, that the marine barracks might be placed under the same control as the barracks of the military.
Sir J. Osborn
said, that the duties of the paymaster of widows' pensions had been greatly increased of late years, not only by the number of pensions being increased ten-fold, but by the payments being made, instead of once, four times a year.
Mr. Croker
said, he was not aware that his letter of 1813 was so long and tedious, until the hon. gentleman had conclusively proved it to be so, by showing that, diligent as he was, he had never read it. The hon. gentleman said, that in that letter it was affirmed, that the paymaster of widows' pensions had been once the treasurer of the navy. Now, this was not the fact. In that letter it was distinctly stated, that the paymaster of widows' pensions, had been not the treasurer, but the paymaster of the navy. The managers of the widows' fund were, in fact, a separate corporation, who might choose any one as their secretary. They had chosen him, because, from the office he held, he had greater facilities for carrying on the extensive correspondence connected with the business of the fund. The late Mr. Rose had given it as his opinion, that the business of paymaster of widows' pensions might be done by the treasurer of the navy; and so, as far as mere payment was concerned, it undoubtedly might; but this was the least part of the business. The main part was the business of inspection and correspondence. As to the paymaster of marines' office, the hon. gentleman proposed to transfer the business of payment to the treasurer of the navy, and that of the barracks to the ordnance. But, if this were done, an increase of officers would be necessary, so that nothing would be saved. To revert to the secretary ship to the widows' fund—the secretary of the Admiralty had been first appointed to that office in 1754, at a salary of 200
l.
l.
578
l.,
Sir. F. Ommaney
said, he was satisfied that, at the present crisis, four lords of the Admiralty were too few, and should move an addition to the present vote of 1,000
l.,
l.
The Chairman
apprehended, that it was impossible to increase the amount of the estimate.
Sir J. Yorke
did not see why the committee might not augment, as well as reduce the estimates.
Mr. Croker
was sorry the hon. baronet, had chosen to remember words which he (Mr. C.) had never spoken, and to forget others which he had uttered. He had told him merely, that the subject had been long under consideration, by a committee of naval men; adding, that if inquiries were made of him (sir F. O.), he might say that he was not responsible, as the matter rested with the lords of the Admiralty.
Mr. Ellice
was opposed to any delay in voting the navy estimates, but would support the amendment.
Sir I. Coffin
insisted, that of late years every attempt had been made to grind; the British navy to dust.
Sir J. Yorke
said, it was not true, that endeavours had been made, of late years, to grind the navy to dust. On the contrary, five millions were going to be voted for its support, and 4,000 seamen added, to the number hitherto kept up. Englishmen knew that what the gallant admiral had said was unfounded; but what would the French say to such a statement? Did
579
Sir I. Coffin
declared, in the face of the House, that the navy of England never was in so naked a state as at present.
The amendment was negatived. After which, the several resolutions were agreed to.
NATIONAL DEBT REDUCTION BILL.]—
On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill,
Mr. Grey Bennet
begged to remind the House, that they were now called upon to give their last vote for this most important bill. It was necessary for them, however, to pause. The question for them to consider was—Would they, or would they not, reduce taxation? Would they, or would they not, comply with the urgent petitions from all parts of the kingdom, calling on them to reduce taxes to their minimum, and to confine their amount to the positive wants of the country? He objected to the passing of the bill on two grounds: the first, that there was no necessity for a sinking fund; the other, that the proposed plan was not likely to effect its objects. Ever since the demise of Mr. Pitt, there had been the most violent departures from the original principle of the sinking fund. It was because the scheme of an hon. friend of his (sir H. Parnell) went to place any sinking fund that might be established out of the control of ministers, that he gave it a preference over that of the chancellor of the exchequer. How hon. gentlemen, who knew the distress which the country at large was at this moment enduring, could tolerate the principle of raising three millions in taxation above what was absolutely necessary, for the purpose of maintaining public credit, was to him a matter of utter astonishment. Feeling that the bill was most pernicious to the best interests of the public, he should move, as an amendment, "That it be read a third time on that day six months."
Mr. Whitmore
said that, looking to the situation in which the country stood, he thought a sinking fund was absolutely necessary for its preservation. If he were asked to adduce one argument stronger than another for the maintenance of such a fund, he should refer to the very beneficial operation effected last year in the
580
l.
Mr. Hume
said, he was anxious to do away the error into which his hon. friend had, fallen, in attributing to the operation of the sinking fund that rise in the 5 per cents, which had enabled the finance minister last year to effect their reduction. It was evident, that there could be no real sinking fund but that which arose from a surplus revenue. The chancellor of the exchequer had, on a late occasion, brought down to the House the official returns of the amount of the sinking fund, from the 5th Jan. 1816, to the 5th Jan. 1823. So far, however, was the right hon. gentleman's. statement, that the reduction of the 5 per cents had been effected through the operation of the sinking fund, in raising the funds, from being borne out by the facts contained in those papers, that they were completely contradicted by them. In 1816, the revenue was 77,133,281
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.;
l.,
l.
581
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.;
l.
l.;
l.,
582
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the hon. member seemed to assume, that he (the chancellor of the exchequer) had, on a former occasion, affirmed, that the reduction which had taken place in the funded and unfunded debt, and in the charge which they imposed upon the country, had been entirely owing to the sinking fund. Now, he had affirmed no such thing. His argument was simply this—that, if the House took the amount of the
583
l.:
l.;
l.
Mr. Tierney
did not rise with the intention of denying that a reduction of the amount of the debt had been effected. That did not appear to be the question at issue. The hon. member for Aberdeen merely wished to show, that no reduction of debt had been caused by the operation of the sinking fund; and, if the clear statement of the hon. member had failed to convince the House of that fact, it would be useless for him to attempt, to do so. He regretted that his hon. friend had proposed to postpone the third reading of the bill for six months. He thought that a delay of six weeks would afford the House sufficient time to determine what measures it would be necessary to adopt. He still thought, that more good would result to the country from the remission of taxes, to the amount of the sinking fund, than from the maintenance of that fund; but, as the feeling of the House was against him, he would not trouble them with one word more respecting it. He would confine himself to the amount of the surplus revenue over expenditure; and that brought him back to the dispute of a former night, as to whether the surplus was 5,00000
l.
l.,
l.
584
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
585
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.,
Mr. Huskisson
expressed his satisfaction at finding, that after the numerous discussions which had taken place on this question, there were so many gentlemen favourable to the principle of' maintaining a sinking fund. He was glad to find that even the right hon. member who spoke last, as well as the hon. member for Portarlington, had in some measure come round to the opinion, that it was necessary to possess a sinking fund composed of the surplus revenue, to be applied to the reduction of the debt; the last hon. member's main objection to it, arising out of a fear that it would operate as a temptation to extravagance on the part of ministers. But, ministers could not touch the sinking fund without the consent of that House. It was not fair to charge ministers with extravagance, for having, on former occasions, with the consent of the House, disposed of portions of the sinking fund in a manner most con-
586
l.;
l.
l.
l.
587
l.
Lord A. Hamilton
contended, that the sinking fund, as it was proposed to be applied, was not calculated for an effective reduction of debt. We had, since the year 1816, had 9,000,000
l.
Mr. Baring
said, he had some difficulty as to the vote which he should give on this occasion. He was favourable to the principle of a sinking fund, but he could not see the justice or policy of making that sinking fund appear more than it really was. It was now admitted, that we had only a sinking fund of three and not one of five millions. This plan was not the offspring of the present chancellor of the exchequer. It had a nearer relation—his predecessor in office—who had left the child at his door, and he believed the right hon. gentleman would be much obliged to the House if it would enable him to throw the baby, basket and all, into the river. With respect to the plan of the hon. baronet, he thought it would not have been a bad one, if it had been applied to the reduction of the 5 per cents last year; but it could not be applied to the 3 per cents without the consent of the holders of stock; which could not be well calculated upon, because there would be a difficulty of selling the new stock in the market. In order to encourage purchasers, some advantage must be held out; and, in that case, less money would be obtained than if government laid out its stock otherwise. But suppose some advantage gained by
588
Mr. Haskisson
observed, that he had not said, that we had only three millions applicable to the debt, but that we had only an excess of three millions of taxes paid into the exchequer; but he did say, that if the proposed plan were adopted, we should have a sinking fund of five millions.
Mr. Ricardo
said, that he felt great delight at the admissions which had at length been made, as to the real amount of the sinking fund now in the exchequer. That pleasure, however, was somewhat qualified, by finding that the House was now called upon to augment this real sum of three millions to the sum of five millions. The chancellor of the exchequer, a few evenings ago, had said, that he did not think there was any hocus pocus in his plan. The House, after that declaration, could scarcely expect to be called on to vote that there was at present a surplus of five millions. An act of parliament could not create a surplus where it was not. As to the objection which had been made against the plan of the hon. baronet, that it might not be agreed to by the holders of the 3 per cents, it had much weight. The plan of the hon. baronet did not presume any such consent. He only proposed, that a trial should be made whether or not the public would consent to it. He proposed to convert a certain sum, say 50,000,000
l.
589
l.
Mr. Ellice
thought there was much inconsistency in the measure before the House. He did not see how he could vote against the bill, seeing that it got rid of the old machinery of the sinking fund, which was so objectionable; at the same time, he did not wish to support that part of the plan, which presumed a surplus of two millions where it did not exist. The best way would be to postpone the measure for six weeks.
The House divided on Mr. Bennet's Amendment: Ayes, 59; Noes, 109.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Hamilton, lord A.
Althorp, visc.
Hill, lord A.
Barrett, S. M.
Hughes, W. L.
Benyon, B.
Hurst, R.
Bernal, R.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Birch, J.
James, W.
Blake, sir F.
Jervoise, G. P.
Boughton, sir W.
Lamb, hon. G.
Browne, Dom.
Lambton, T. G.
Calcraft, J.
Lemon, sir W.
Calvert, C.
Lennard, T. B.
Campbell, W. J.
Lethbridge, sir T.
Creevey, T.
Leycester, R.
Davenport, D.
Lushiligton, S.
Denison, W. J.
Leader, W.
De Crespigny, sir W.
Maberly, J.
Duncannon, visc.
Macdonald, J.
Dundas, C.
Marjoribanks, S.
Fergusson, sir R.
Monck, J. B.
Foley, J. H. H.
Normanby, visc.
Guise, sir W.
Ord, Wm.
590
Pares, T.
Titchfield, marquis
Price, Robt.
Webb, E.
Poyntz, W. S.
Wilson, sir R.
Pym, F.
Wood, M.
Ridley, sir M. W.
Wyvill, M.
Robarts, G. J.
TELLERS.
Robinson, sir G.
Hume, J.
Sefton, earl of
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Smith, W.
Sykes, D.
PAIRED OFF.
Talbot, R. W.
Anson, sir G.
Tierney, right hon. G.
Burdett, sir F.
On Mr. Baring's amendment, to leave out the words "five millions," in order to insert "three millions," the House again divided: Ayes, 72; Noes, 100. The bill was then read a third time, and passed.
FOUR AND A HALF PER CENT LEEWARD ISLAND DUTY.]—
On the order of the day for going into a committee of supply,
Mr. Creevey
said, that understanding that when the Speaker left the chair, it was the intention of the hon. gentleman opposite to bring forward the ordnance estimates, he should take the opportunity of calling the attention of the House to a point very intimately connected with them. Gentlemen would have observed, that in those estimates there was an item of 24,412
l.
591
l.
592
bonâ fide
593
l.
594
595
Mr. Ward
said, it was an error to suppose, that the sum mentioned in the ordnance estimates, was for the erecting and repairing of any buildings to which the act of the colonial assembly could be applied. Not one penny of the ordnance grant in question went to defray the expense of buildings provided for by the act of the colonial assembly. The buildings mentioned in this act were a council-house, a chamber, a session-house, and a prison. But the sum in the ordnance estimate was required for repairing the ordnance wharf, for building storehouses, and other similar purposes, never contemplated at the time of passing the act of the colonial assembly. Various expenses were incurred by government at Barbadoes, in consequence of making it, the head quarters; distinct from any expenses the colonial assembly had contemplated; and to cover these, the grant in question was to be applied.
. Mr. Hume
said, that the act of 1663 was a kind of commutation, to enable the king to maintain the public works before kept up by the inhabitants. No time could be more proper, than the present for bringing this subject under the notice of the House. If the people were to be continually burthened by new charges, when the expenses were already provided for by the colonies, there was no extravagance to which the House might not go. It would be better for England to be destitute of colonies, than to be subjected to the enormous expense entailed on us by them. They were a mere drain on the country.
Sir Charles Long
said, that the act of the colonial assembly did not contemplate the present expense. The object of that act was merely the defence of the island. Since then a naval arsenal had been established; the expense incurred by which, could not be provided for out of the 4½ per cent fund. The 4½ per cent duty was given to the king for confirming titles to estates, and in consequence of his relinquishing another duty, without annexing any conditions to giving it up. In the same year, the islands of Nevis, Montserrat, and St. Christopher made similar grants to the king, without any condition whatever. In the reign of king William, lord Somers had consented that the duty in question should form part of the civil list. What queen Anne had done, on the petition of the inhabitants of Barbadoes, was all matter of grace. For a
596
Mr. Bernal
said, it was absurd to contend, that the fund had not been diverted from its original purpose. He denied that the 4½ per cent was granted for any purpose but to defray the public charges of the island. The fund had been extorted from the inhabitants of Barbadoes; and, though continued for a century, it was still nothing but extortion. It was not possible to read the act, and say that 24,000
l.
Mr. Wilmot
said, that the argument of the hon. gentleman proved too much. If it were true, that the 4½ per cent duties had been extorted, they ought to be restored unconditionally; but still it would be necessary, that the House should vote the 24,412
l.
The House divided: For Mr. Creevey's Motion, 56; Against it, 80. Majority, 24.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Denison, W. J.
Althorp, visc.
Ellice, E.
Benyon, B.
Farquharson, A.
Bennet, hon. G.
Fergusson, sir R.
Birch, J.
Guise, sir B. W.
Blake, sir F.
Gaskell, B.
Browne, Dom.
Hume, J.
Calcraft, J.
Hurst, R.
Campbell, W. F.
Hobhouse, J. C.
De Crespigny, sir W.
Hamilton, lord A.
597
Jervoise, G. P.
Ricardo, D.
James, W.
Ridley, sir M. W.
Knight, R.
Rice, T. S.
Lewis, W.
Smith, G.
Leycester, R.
Sykes, D.
Lambton, J. G.
Scott, James
Lamb, hon. G.
Titchfield, marq.
Lennard, T. B.
Tierney, rt. hon. Geo.
Marjoribanks, S.
Wood, alderman
Normanby, visc.
Warre, James A.
Newport, rt. hon sir J.
Wharton, John
Ord, Wm.
Wyvill, M.
Philips, G.
Webbe, E.
Philips, G. jun.
Williams, W.
Price, R.
Wilson, sir R.
Pym, F.
TELLERS.
Poyntz, hon. Wm. S.
Pares, Thos.
Creevey, T.
Robinson, sir G.
Bernal, R
ORDNANCE ESTIMATES.]—
The House having resolved itself into a committee,
Mr. Ward
said, that before he moved the Ordnance Estimates in the order in which they were usually voted, he should merely observe, that there was a diminution of expenditure in every item except one, in which there was an increase of 776
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Hume
declared, that a reduction of 4 per cent upon the whole cost of the ordnance department was not such as the country had a right to expect. With re-
598
The resolution was agreed to. On the resolution, that 7,025
l.
s.
d.
Mr. Hume
objected to the unnecessary expense of the establishments at Waltham Abbey and Faversham, which had cost the country 150,000
l.
Mr. Ward
said, it was true that the manufacture of gunpowder was no longer carried on at Faversham; but that establishment was continued because there were facilities at Faversham, which there were not at Waltham Abbey. The reason why the inspector lived at Faversham was, that there was a house at that establishment, and not at Waltham Abbey. With regard to the laboratory, be thought that the House would not object to the trifling expense of that establishment, while there was a prospect of accomplishing the ingenious projects which his hon. friend (sir W. Congreve) had conceived, of regenerating damaged gunpowder, in all cases in which it had not come into contact with sea-water.
Mr. Hume
said, it appeared to be the system that, in every place, the clerks and officers should get palaces, without regard to the expense which they cost; and, unless the house should compel them to sell off the whole of these unnecessary palaces, such would continue to be the system. He had in his hand a list of no fewer than 485 of these houses.
On the resolution, "That 241,235
l.
s.
d.
599
Mr. Hume
said, he would not repeat the objections he had offered last year to this item of charge: but should move, as an amendment, that the sum be reduced 15,000
l.
Mr. Ward
adverted to the inexpediency of lessening the number of such a corps of officers as the artillery, who were obliged to go through a regular course of education and science to qualify them for their profession. He had the authority of the duke of Wellington against any reduction of officers.
Mr. Hume
said, he attached no importance to what the duke of Wellington might say on such a subject. The noble duke had said, that there was not a man more than was necessary for the service; and yet, notwithstanding this declaration, he had discharged to the right and left. He would not give a fig for such authority. He did not propose, by the present reduction, to deprive the regiment of either men or science. He merely proposed to effect a saving, by a different mode of brigading.
Mr. Ward
said, the noble duke had stated, that he could not do with a man less on the then estimates; but had added, that he had prospective views of reduction. These views he had since carried into effect.
The committee divided: For the Amendment, 30; Against it, 69.
List of the Minority.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Lambton, J. G.
Bernal, R.
Leader, W.
Blake, sir F.
Monck, J. B.
Browne, D.
Poyntz, W. S.
Caulfield, hon. H.
Robarts, G. J.
De Crespigmy, sir W.
Robinson, sir G.
Denison, W. J.
Scott, J.
Duncannon, visc.
Smith, W.
Evans, W.
Warre, J. A.
Farquharson, A.
Webb, E.
Guise, sir W.
Whitmore, W. W.
Hume, J.
Williams, T. P.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Williams, W.
James, W.
Wyvill, M.
Jervoise, G. P.
TELLER.
Lamb, hon. G.
Ricardo, D.
On the resolution, "That 6,937
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.
600
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, March 18, 1823.
KING'S LIBRARY.]—
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said:—In pursuance, Sir, of my notice, I am now about to submit to House a motion respecting the noble and munificent gift which his majesty has, with so much liberality, presented to the nation; and I feel that if, in doing so, I were to enter into any length of detail, I should do but little credit to the grace and dignity with which the present has been made. It is a donation which, I am satisfied, every man in this House, and in the country, will feel to be of the highest importance. If, indeed, there be any person—and I do not consider it possible that there can be—who may think that there is no connection between the literature of the country and its general wellbeing—to that person, undoubtedly, the grant, or the possession, of so valuable a library as that to which my motion will refer, will be a matter of no sort of interest. But by those who take a more enlarged view of the subject—by those who think that there is an intimate connexion between the literature and the morals of the country—by those who think that there is an analogy between a love of letters and a love of freedom—it is impossible that this transaction should not be regarded with feelings of the deepest interest. This library, Sir, which it has been his majesty's pleasure to give to the nation, was collected by his late venerated father, during the course of a long and exemplary life; and although, perhaps, the circumstances which attended his youthful education, and the fact of his having been at so early a period oppressed with the cares of royalty, might reasonably seem to have precluded him from applying himself to objects of this kind; yet it is, I think, on these very accounts, the more honourable to the character of his late majesty, that, from his accession to the throne, down to the unhappy moment in which, by one of the most calamitous visitations of Providence, he was deprived of the means of pursuing any object relating to his own benefit or to the good of his people, he employed himself actively, zealously, and carefully in forming this collection. But, if it is surprising that his late majesty, under such circumstances, should so have occupied himself, it is not surprising, I conceive, that his present majesty, influenced by that finished taste,
601
602
Sir C. Long
said, that the donation was unquestionably of the greatest value to the country, because, for its extent, it was the most complete library ever collected. It had been accumulated by his late majesty, during the whole course of his reign, and without any regard to expense. It had been collected under the direction of Dr. Johnson, who had laid down the plan for its formation, and which plan had been followed as closely as possible. Having had communications with his majesty on the subject, he was enabled to say, that his majesty earnestly wished that the public might have the freest access possible to this library, limited only by such regulations as were necessary for the safety and preservation of the collection. His majesty had also another and a very natural wish, that as the collection had been entirely made by his late father, it should be kept separate and distinct. Having had frequent opportunities of inspecting this library, he was bound to say, that he believed there never was a library so complete in its arrangements, with catalogues so admirably framed, and in every respect so well calculated to afford the means of ready reference. He thought it right to mention this fact, because it did the greatest credit to the persons under whose care it had been placed. He was perfectly sure, that the union of this library with that of the British Museum and the library of the late sir Joseph Banks (which, although small, was perfect in one branch of literature), would constitute the finest library that existed in Europe. He had the gratification also to say, that it was his majesty's intention to add to the donation a most valuable collection of medals, formed under the superintendance of himself and of his late majesty. To his knowledge, his majesty had been a most liberal patron to the fine arts. By the present splendid gift he would show himself an equally zealous friend to science and literature. He was sure, therefore, that all who heard him would
603
The motion was then agreed to.
REPEAL OF ASSESSED TAXES.]—
Mr. Maberly
rose to submit the motion of which he had given notice. He feared that the time which had elapsed since that notice, and the repeated discussions which had taken place in the interim, upon the bill of the chancellor of the exchequer, had greatly prejudiced the chance which his (Mr. M.'s) motion might possess of adoption by the House. This great question had, indeed, been prejudiced; but although the chancellor of the exchequer's bill had passed, it did not therefore follow, when he came forward to ask for the repeal of certain taxes, that he was to be denied, on account of the passing of that bill. That bill did, in fact, contain a clause, by which the House was enabled, during the present session, to alter, repeal, or amend it. It was needless for him to say, that he disapproved of that bill; but in the argument which he was about to bring forward, he should take the saving to be, as the right hon. gentleman had thought proper to put it, five millions. The chancellor of the exchequer had admitted, that it was expedient to reduce taxation to repeal, in fact, the very species of taxes which he was now about to require the House to do. The great question between himself and the right hon. gentleman was this—Whether, under all the circumstances of the case, the proposition now to be submitted to the House was more likely to benefit the country generally, to support public credit, and to maintain national honour and dignity, than the proposition of the right hon. gentleman. He confessed, that he thought the mode in which he should propose to support public credit, and enable government to reduce taxation, would have a much more beneficial effect than the plan suggested by the chancellor of the exchequer; because it would give a much greater relief to the people. Now, before he stated to the House the taxes, the repeal of which he intended to propose, he would take a short view of the financial state of the country. That would enable them to ascertain whether they could with safety, and with advantage to the country, repeal the whole of those taxes, the repeal of only part of which was proposed by the right hon. gentleman. He would first acknowledge,
604
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
605
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l,
l.,
l.
l.
l.
606
l.
l.
s.
d.
l.
607
l.
The window tax
£1,205,000
The house tax
1,256,000
Male servants
159,500
Clerks, shopmen, travellers, &c.
98,050
Four-wheeled carriages
145,000
Two-wheeled carriages
98,000
Coachmakers' licences
3,000
Horses, riding and drawing
324,000
Ponies
9,100
Bailiffs' horses
1,050
Butchers' horses
4,400
Horses and mules, at a lower rate of duty
72,500
The assessed taxes composition
35,000
Total
£3,410,600
The hon. gentleman then moved his first resolution, "That all duties on Windows imposed by 48th Geo. 3rd, and subsequent acts, should cease and determine."
Sir W. De Crespigny,
in seconding it, mentioned the fact of an old lady having been frightened into fits at the sight of the window tax gatherer.
608
Mr. Herries
said, that his right hon. friend, the chancellor of the exchequer, had so fully and so eloquently explained the nature of his plans, that it would be unnecessary for him, even were he competent to the task, to enter into a detail of those plans. The question now to be considered was, not what was the partial pressure of any tax, but whether, under all the circumstances of the, case, we could afford to make any further reductions than those which had been already proposed. The hon. member opposite admitted the necessity of supporting a sinking fund, "but," said that hon. member, "if you will adopt my plan, you will have a more effective sinking fund than the one proposed by the, chancellar of the exchequer." This he (Mr. H.) denied. On the contrary, he maintained, that the hon. member's plan would leave no sinking fund at all. If we saw in the country signs of distress—if we found a diminution in the consumption of articles of taxation—then we might begin to look about, and consider whether taxes so oppressive ought, or ought not to be continued. But we had not arrived at that state. Every view which we took of the state of the country, gave ground for a contrary opinion. He did not mean to deny, that amongst some classes distress prevailed; but he contended, that the general state of the country was by no means such as could justify them in forsaking that system, which, he considered necessary for the maintenance of the public credit. The hon. gentleman talked of the distress that prevailed. But what was the fact? Why, there was a considerable increase since the year 1817, of carriages, servants, &c. There was also an increased consumption of most articles. He, therefore, did not conceive that the House would be at all justified in adopting the proposition of hon. member.
Sir F. Blake
regretted that the National Debt Reduction bill should have passed the House. It appeared to him a singular inconsistency, that, after having admitted the true principle of a sinking fund to rest in a surplus of revenue, and after the admission that the present surplus did not exceed three millions, the House should have sanctioned a bill, which went upon the assumption, that we had a sinking fund of five millions. If he were asked he would do with he would do with the surplus revenue, he would say, let it be applied
609
The House divided: Ayes, 48; Noes, 94. The other resolutions were negatived without a division.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Hume, J.
Althorp, visc.
Hurst, R.
Belgrave, visc.
James, W.
Benett, J.
Johnstone, col.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Knight, R.
Bernal, R.
Keck, G. A. L.
Birch, J.
Lambton, J. G.
Blake, sir F.
Lethbridge, sir T.
Boughey, sir J.
Maberly, W. L.
Bright, H.
Monck, J. B.
Burdett, sir F.
Moore, P.
Calvert, C.
Poyntz, hon. W. S.
Creevey, T.
Price, R.
Curwen, J. C.
Ricardo, D.
Davenport, D.
Robinson, sir G.
Davies, T. H.
Scott, J.
De Crespigny, sir W.
Smith, W.
Denison, W. J.
Sykes, D.
Dundas, C.
Webb, E.
Farrand, R.
Wharton, J.
Fergusson, sir R.
Whitbread, W. H.
Folkestone, visc.
Williams, Owen.
Guise, sir W.
Wyvill, M.
Hamilton, lord A.
Hobhouse, J. C.
TELLER.
Hughes, W. L.
Maberly, J.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' BILL.]—
Mr. Peter Moore
rose, for leave to bring in a bill for the repeal of the Insolvent Debtors' act. Of the evils occasioned by the act, no man could doubt, who was aware of the fact, that five farthings in the pound was the whole amount of dividend received from the estates of those who had taken the benefit of it. He might be asked, why he did not move to go into a committee upon the act, instead of moving to repeal it? There had already been 200 committees upon it; and the result which all of them had come to was, that they did not know how to remedy its evils.
610
Lord Althorp
could not agree to the repeal of these acts, unless a new act was brought in to remedy the evils which they were said to have created. He was surprised that the hon. member should have repeated the statement of five farthings in the pound being the whole amount of dividend received under the present acts. The return to which the hon. member alluded, was made under the act as it existed before it was amended. The present law was founded on a very salutary principle; but he would not deny that, in its details, it might require several amendments. He was, therefore, glad to hear, that the solicitor-general had pledged himself to take it under his consideration. He wished the House would compare the law as it now bore upon insolvent debtors, with the one which had formerly existed regarding them. Formerly, the creditor might imprison his debtor for life, and the imprisonment served as a discharge for the debt. The consequence was, that the gaols became filled by degrees; and acts were constantly passed to empty them. He was of opinion that, under the present law, the confinement was not long enough. He likewise thought that it would be a considerable amendment of the present system, if a power were given to a certain number of creditors to object to an insolvent's discharge.
Mr. Wynn
said, that when the small sum recovered from insolvents under the present act was spoken of, they should consider what would have been the sum recovered if the present law had not passed. Under the old system occasional insolvent acts were passed by which the gaols were emptied of debtors without any examination; so that the practice was constantly resorted to by the debtors of suffering a mere simulated confinement, in order to get rid of the claims of their creditors. He was glad the solicitor-general had undertaken the amendment of the act; as he could by no means agree to abandon the principle of it.
Mr. Abercromby
was convinced, that no one who was acquainted with the ancient
611
l.
cessio bonorum
Mr. Hobhouse
hoped his hon. friend would withdraw his motion. It had been stated, that there was 10,000
l.
l.
s.
d.
s.
d.;
l.
s.;
612
l.
s.
Sir. R. Wilson
said, that though his constituents had met to consider of these acts, there was not one of them who had held up his hand for the repeal of the principle on which they were founded.
Mr. Bright
thought that some means might be found of conciliating the principle of the Insolvent acts, with security to creditors. Imprisonment, for example, might be proportioned to the amount of the debt: a long period might be awarded for a large debt, and a smaller period for smaller debts. The principle of the
cessio bonorum
Habeas Corpus
Mr. Sykes
said, the question was, whether the Insolvent act should be totally repealed, or only amended. He was in favour of the latter. He complained that the provisions of the act before magistrates in the country were executed in a very loose way. The debtor was discharged almost without inquiry, as opposition was ineffectual.
The Solicitor General
said, that the feeling of the House was clearly in favour of the principle of the bill. If, however, the motion of the hon. gentleman were carried, the future effects of an insolvent would not be liable to his creditors, because that provision of the existing law would be repealed. Besides, every individual discharged, and now able to plead the statute in answer to a renewed claim, would be deprived of that protec-
613
l.
614
Mr. Ellice
concurred in the general principles stated by the solicitor-general. He congratulated the House and the country, that the law officers of the crown had pledged themselves to frame a measure to remedy the evils of the existing act.
Mr. Hume
thought the enormous expense of proceedings in the Insolvent Debtors' court, were worthy of the serious attention of the solicitor-general. If the law gave creditors no power over the persons of debtors, they would be more cautious in trusting. He thought it would be for the advantage of debtor, the creditor, and the public if imprisonment for debt were wholly abolished. But, while the House sanctioned the principle of not detaining people in prison for debt, he was surprised they should permit the crown to imprison its debtors for life. In Scotland the case was different. He could conceive no worse means of getting payment of a debt, than to confine individuals fur 10, 15, or 20 years. It threw into the hands of government a power of confining for life an individual obnoxious on account of his political principles, and of letting those at large, who would purchase their liberty by subserviency. It was a cruel thing to confine a poor wretch for a paltry debt of 10
l.,
Sir J. Newport
explained the operation of the Insolvent Debtors' act in Ireland. No complaints were made in that country. The people were not much disposed to give credit; and it was from the facility of giving credit, that most of the evils arose.
The Solicitor General
said, that the bill of costs complained of by an hon. member did not affect the constitution of the court. It was merely a bill between solicitor and client.
615
Mr. Hobhouse
said, it was the bill of one of, those attorneys to whom the forms of the court obliged persons to apply. The bill was made out from the printed regulations; and it was so far a recognized bill, that the debtor might be arrested at any moment for its amount.
Mr. W. C. Wilson
wished that en adviser, in the way of
amicus curiœ
The motion was then withdrawn.
PROFANE SWEARING BELL.]—
Dr. Phillimore
asked for leave to bring in a bill to repeal an existing statute which subjected a clergyman to 5
l.
Mr. Evans
supported the motion.
Mr. Warre
hoped the hon. gentleman extend his repeal to the reading of the new Marriage act in parish churches.
Sir. J. Newport
thought that no acts of parliament whatever ought to be read in churches. Few congregations stayed to listen to them.
Mr. W. C. Wilson
supported the motion. He had never heard the act against swearing read in a church in his life; and yet he knew a vicar who had been twice fined for omitting to read it.
Dr. Phillimore
said, that the clause in the Marriage act compelling it to be read in churches had been none of his suggesting. On the contrary, he had distinctly opposed that provision. He agreed with the hon. baronet, that it was improper to read any act of parliament in a church; but he called the attention of the House to the act against profane swearing particularly, because he believed it was the only act for the non-reading of which a penalty was provided.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
MUTINY BILL—FOREIGN RELATIONS.]—
On the order of the day for the third reading of the Mutiny bill,
616
Sir F. Burdett
adverted to the atrocious, and unmanly system of flogging which was still kept up in the army, and which he had hoped the government would, ere this, have seen the propriety of taking some means to abolish. The summary, dismissal of an officer for the cruelty with which he had inflicted this punishment, proved that the government were not in sensible to the evils arising from this system. The conduct of that officer would almost justify a stretch of power in the mode of his dismissal; but it would be much better to put an end at once to so odious and degrading a punishment, than to attempt to mitigate the evils arising from it by another act of arbitrary power. This was a subject which deserved the separate consideration of the House; and he should content himself at present with giving notice that he should, on a future day, bring forward a motion, in which he would endeavour to persuade the House, that the time was arrived when this most odious, unmanly, and detestable punishment ought to be altogether abolished.—That he might not be supposed to acquiesce in the conduct which ministers seemed determined to pursue Abe present contest between France and Spain, he could not omit that opportunity of expressing his extreme surprise and regret at that conduct—conduct, to which he scarcely knew what epithet to apply, and which was utterly unworthy of this country. A standing army had only been introduced and maintained in time of peace in this country, under the pretence of the necessity of preserving the balance of power, and the independence of the nations of Europe. This being the only cause for which a standing army was kept up in time of peace, he might fairly enter his protest against that dereliction of duty betrayed by his majesty's ministers, when, calling upon the House for the support of so large a military force, they at the same time abandoned all the objects for which that force could be constitutionally employed. In the absence of the secretary of state for foreign affairs it might not be considered altogether correct to enter fully into this question; and he was disposed to wait, in order to hear what ministers had to say. From the statements which had been made at the commencement of the session they had led the House to believe, that they would maintain the honour of England and the independence and liberties of Europe. Undoubtedly, the incur-
617
618
Mr. Secretary Peel
rose rather to deprecate discussion, than to reply to anything which had fallen from the hon. baronet. The admission of the hon. baronet himself, justified, this course; because, if it was not proper without due notice to bring on a motion for the abolition of military flogging, still less was it prudent, without regular notice, to discuss that subject to which the latter portion of the hon. baronet's speech had applied. His right hon. friend, shortly
619
Mr. Hobhouse
thought that his hon. friend had merely followed the line of his duty. A strong suspicion prevailed, that, so far from observing a strict neutrality, the English government had supported the proposed oppressions of France, rather than remonstrated against them. It was rumoured, that the English minister at Madrid had been endeavouring to persuade the Cortes to give up some portion of that constitution which both Spain and the holy alliance had sworn to support. He trusted no such conduct had been pursued by ministers. With respect to the Mutiny bill, he felt indebted to his gallant friend for mooting the point afresh as to the right of the crown to dismiss Officers without subjecting them to a court-martial. As to the arguments of the noble secretary at war, upon the exercise of the prerogative on the point in question, they were absolutely absurd. To talk of an inherent prerogative of the crown to dismiss officers from the army, when it was well known that, anciently, the kings of England had no such thing as a standing army, was ridiculous. He admitted, that the right had been frequently claimed for the prerogative; but to represent it as being undisputed, was far, indeed, from the fact. Let the House look to what passed on the celebrated affair of lord Cobham's dismissal. The right was so far from being admitted, that it was emphatically denied by all the greatest men in the House. His hon. friend had been rebuked for citing Montesquieu and Blackstone upon such a question. He would offer an authority of more weight than either—that of George 1st. Upon the debate occasioned by lord Cobham's dismissal (which tool place in the reign of George
620
Mr. W. Courtenay
confessed he entertained an opinion upon the subject diametrically opposite to that which the hon. gentleman had just expressed. He was prepared to maintain, that in the eye of the law, every thing must be considered as the undoubted right of the prerogative, which had so remained from the time of the Revolution down to this period. That this power in the prerogative had been enjoyed and exercised since the Revolution downwards, was what he positively asserted. That it had been occasionally called in question, he did not deny. Nothing could be more strange than the authority adduced by the hon. gentleman. George 1st, a foreigner, though called to the government, under circumstances certainly dear to the feelings of the country, was yet the last person to be cited upon the doctrines of a constitution with which he could not be over well acquainted. Supposing the question, whether such a power did or did not exist in the crown, were now agitated for the first time, could it be answered in any way but in the affirmative? Could an army be kept on foot without that law? Were there other means to prevent an army once on foot, from becoming the greatest nuisance to the constitution and the liberties of the country? With respect to the other point, he denied that the hon. baronet was correct in the assumption, that the country was prepared to go along with him, in the propriety of plunging into the war. That was the general feeling of the people of England. It was
621
Sir R. Wilson
denied that the people would entertain those feelings, with respect to the preserving of neutrality, which the last speaker had asserted they would do. They would consider the causes of the war; they would see that it was not a war against Spain merely, but a war of tyrants, fanatics, and bigots, against the rights of free nations. They would see that it was a war against liberty; they would observe who were the crusaders; they would see who were the advocates of neutrality, now that the strife was against liberty; and, probably, they would find them to be the very parties who had preached up war when it was raging against liberty. For, what was this war of France upon Spain? Was it not for that which it was impossible for any nation to give up? Was it not to forte Spain to yield the point of honour? And, after she had done that, they might bid her take back her inquisition, and all the other engines of ignorance and slavery. There was, in short, no point of degradation at which she would stop. The French had dared the dishonour of Spain. He was an unworthy Briton who would tamely see France trample on the rights of Spain. Let the war proceed, and he felt certain that the people of this country would discharge the duty which they owed the Spaniards. He hoped and trusted, that this brave and generous people would, notwithstanding the Foreign Enlistment bill, go over in crowds, and rally round the banners of honour and freedom.
Mr. T. Wilson
trusted that the country would be satisfied with the explanation given by ministers. For his part, he was not afraid of being charged with possessing a dastardly spirit, because he hoped that the national honour might be preserved, without the hazard and difficulties of a war.
Colonel Davies
expressed his surprise at what had fallen from the hon. city member. That hon. gentleman had attended the meeting convened, for the
622
Mr. Ricardo
protested against the inference, with respect to those who had attended the dinner given to the Spanish minister. He felt a deep sympathy with the Spanish people; but he was very far from intending, by his attendance at that meeting, to pledge himself to engage the nation in war. He had no hesitation in declaring his opinion, that it would be wise in this country to keep out of the war. At any rate, the House ought to hear what ministers had to say, before it came to a decision on the subject. Right or wrong, it was not fair to condemn them unheard.
Mr. Denison
said, he had refused to attend the meeting, because he would not be considered as pledging himself to support a war on behalf of the Spanish nation. He was for preserving the national honour, without the hazard of war, if that were practicable. He was sorry to differ from his friends; but he was convinced the country ought to do any thing, consistently with its honour, to shun that abyss from which it had so recently escaped.
Sir J. Newport
said, that no man deprecated more than he did, the conduct of France towards Spain; but that would not make him forget the calamities of war. The evils of the late war had been severely felt. We could not help them now. But they should teach us to pause, ere we plunged the country into another. He hoped he should be understood. Rather than compromise the honour of the country, he would go to, war; but still he thought that war should, if possible, be avoided.
Mr. Jones
said, that during the late war, he remembered hearing the hon. baronet opposite deprecate the interference of one country in the internal affairs of another; whether that country were ruled by a lawful king, a directory, or a republican government. He should like to hear explained, the circumstances which had induced the hon. baronet and
623
Mr. W. Williams
said, that when he recollected the conduct of ministers on the occasion of the infamous attack upon Naples, he felt that he could not give them credit for liberality. He was most impatient, therefore, to see the documents which were to be produced. Respecting the dinner at which he had attended, he denied having the least idea of pledging himself to any particular line of conduct. His object was to hold out to the world his detestation of the principles upon which France was proceeding, with regard to Spain. It was impossible for him to convey, in suitable language, what he felt with regard to the conduct of the despots of Europe. He should best come near it by using the words of a modern poet:—
"Nations would do well
T' extort their truncheons from the puny hands
Of heroes, whose infirm and baby minds
Are gratified with mischief; and who spoil,
Because men suffer it, their toy, the world."
The bill was read a third time.
MARRIAGE ACT REPEAL BILL.]—
The House having gone into a committee on this bill,
The Attorney-General
said, that the object of the bill was, to bring back the law to the same state as it was under the act of George 2nd, with respect to licences and the solemnization of marriages; in short, in every respect, save the invalidating marriages, when some of the provisions of the latter act had not been complied with.
Dr. Phillimore
said, that so far as the object of the present bill was to repeal all that part of the act of last session which had proceeded from the House of Lords, and to retain all that had originated with the House of Commons, it was impossible he could object to it. It was valuable also, because it contained a distinct recognition of the principle for which he had so long struggled. But he thought the bill objectionable, because on the face of it, it purported to be a temporary measure; that was, it took off several restrictions, intimating that some months hence other restrictions would be imposed. The House might depend upon it, that when the other restrictions were imposed, however lenient they might be, they would excite clamour and discontent. This was an unfortunate expedient, a
624
ABOLITION OF SLAVERY.]—
Mr. Wilberforce
said, that in rising, in pursuance of his notice to offer to the House the interesting petition which had been intrusted to his care, he felt confident, that the subject of the petition would of itself recommend it to the attention of a British House of Commons, and that an additional motive for that attention would be found in the character of the parties from whom the petition proceeded; a body of individuals who seldom came forward to take any share in public concerns, and who could be induced to do so only when they felt themselves called upon by considerations and objects affecting the hest and highest interests of society. On the part of the Society of Friends, commonly called Quakers, in Great Britain and Ireland, he held in his hand a petition which he begged leave to present, praying for the Abolition of Slavery throughout the British dominions. He well remembered, to the great honour of the same class of individuals, that they were the first to present a petition to parliament for the abolition of the slave trade. On that occasion, they had appealed to the great principles of humanity and religion. They had also maintained,
625
626
627
628
629
Mr. Canning
asked whether it was the
630
Mr. Wilberforce
said it was not, but that such was the intention of an hon. and much esteemed friend of his.
Mr. F. Buxton
then gave notice, that on the 22nd of April, he would submit a motion, that the House should take into consideration the state of slavery in the British colonies.
ARMY EXTRAORDINARIES AND MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES.]—
The House resolved itself into a committee of supply. On the resolution, "That 620,000
l.
Mr. Hume
admitted the details of the estimate to be in general satisfactory, although he thought that the accounts might still be furnished in a more simple and intelligible shape. The charge for colonies he principally objected to. That item was only 8,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
631
Mr. Wilmot
said, that the value of our colonies was not to be determined by the mere expense they cost, but a great variety of other circumstances. As to the crown lands in Canada, he would say, that Mr. Gourlay had grossly vilified the government of Canada. Considering the political situation of Canada, it was not possible to separate it from the empire; and, owing to that situation, the expense incurred was necessary. As to Bermuda, it was a naval station, and the expenditure for it was determined by very different principles and motives. He would not notice what had been said regarding the Mauritius, further than by observing, that the commissioners sent thither would shortly furnish such information as would render all dispute as to the facts unnecessary. As to the Ionian Islands he could not allow it to be supposed from his silence, that he acquiesced in the assertion, that our troops were stationed there to suppress independence, and keep down disaffection. He could assure the hon. member, that the change to which he Alluded was not the conse-
632
Mr. Hume
said, he had proved the charges which he had brought against the governor of the Ionian Islands. The conduct of sir T. Maitland had been completely changed towards the Greeks since he had brought forward his motion. The fact was notoriously so, and all he (Mr. H.) had ever wanted was, that a strict neutrality should be observed. A communication from the Ionian Islands, of a very late date, expressed the gratitude of the inhabitants for the total change in the tone and conduct of the British authorities, as regarded the Greeks and their cause. If this did not arise from any order on the part of ministers, it showed, that in this, as well as in some other cases, too much credit had been given them. As to Mr. Gourlay, he considered him a severely oppressed man, who had been troublesome, and of whom the colony had taken care to get rid. It did not follow, that because a man was troublesome, he ought to be expelled. He spoke feelingly. He did not wish, like Mr. Gourlay, to be driven tot break stones upon the public highways. He had no hesitation in saying, that Mr. Gourlay had been removed from Canada most unjustly; because he entertained liberal opinions, and charged a public officer with receiving fees after he had accepted a fixed income in lieu of them. He (Mr. H.) earnestly recommended, that freedom and independence should be given to the Canadas'. They would then be able to stand by themselves: where as if a war broke out between this country and America, we might spend a vast deal of blood and treasure in defending them, and yet lose them in the end. At present we could relinquish them with honour. Here after we might be compelled to abandon them with disgrace.
633
Mr. Bennet,
from personal knowledge and long intimacy, bore testimony to the honesty and disinterestedness of the public officer accused by Mr. Gourlay.
Mr. Wilmot
was quite sure the charges would turn out to be unfounded.
l.
Mr. Bennet
rose to make some remarks on the ruinous and disgraceful condition of St. James's Park, the Green Park, and Hyde Park. The trees were falling to decay, the railings broken down, the paths were not attended to. They were kept open all night, and were the resort of the lowest and most profligate characters; in short, no attention was paid to their preservation, or appearance, or police, or to the convenience of the public. They gave the perfect idea of an estate which one sometimes passes in travelling, and which was described as the property of Mr. So and So, whose affairs were unfortunately in Chancery. In every possible way the public were incommoded. If there was a gate, it was so small that no, man with a burthen could pass; if there was a useful footpath, it was stopped up; if there was an entrance in a particularly convenient place, it was kept locked. In fact, every thing was done in such a way as if the favour to the public were yielded as grudgingly as possible. Cattle were turned out into the Green Park, by which one of the finest meadows possible was turned into a quagmire, like a stable-yard. Two gentlemen condescended to pocket a considerable sum as rangers, and this practice, he supposed, conduced to their profit. As compared with the management of those parks, the Regent's Park, which was under the woods and forests' board, presented a striking contrast.
Mr. Secretary Peel
concurred with the hon. gentleman, that the subject was one of sufficient importance to the comforts of the people of the metropolis to deserve consideration, and he thought the House would agree, that, if the revenue of the parkas, was too limited to keep them in proper condition, no moderate sum could be better employed than in supplying the deficiency. He had made inquiries into the subject, and should take steps in consequence; though some of the matters complained of had a view to public convenience. For instance, the
634
The resolution was agreed to.
On the resolution, "That 3,000
l.
Mr. Hume
objected to the establishment. He believed that other institutions in the metropolis, which did not receive a shilling of the public money, far excelled this establishment in utility. He wished this vote to be postponed until a return, showing what had been done by this establishment, was laid on the table.
Mr. Dawson
defended the public establishment, as an institution of the greatest utility, and contended, that the vote was absolutely necessary for its support. The return would show, that the establishment had been productive of great benefit. This was the only institution to which the country could look for pure vaccine matter.
Mr. Hume
did not wish to put down the establishment altogether, but objected to the manner in which the money was expended. He could not agree to pay 800
l.
l.
Mr. Dawson
said, that where so eminent a physician as sir H. Halford devoted two hours of one day in every week to the business of the institution, he could not be overpaid with 100
l.
Sir W. Guise
said, that the country was under great obligations to Dr. Jenner, and he trusted the government would see the propriety of erecting a monument to his memory. He thought the House ought to add 500
l.
The Chairman
said, that such a motion could not be made. It had been decided, that a vote of money could not be increased in the committee.
Alderman. Wood
said, he had no doubt,
635
Mr. Bright
was of opinion, that the public money was never better expended than in erecting monuments to those who had made great and useful discoveries. Dr. Jenner was one to whom the country was deeply indebted. He hoped the hon. baronet would move, in a fuller house, for the sum he had mentioned.
The resolution was agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, March 21, 1823.
NATIONAL DEBT REDUCTION BILL.]—
On the order of the day for going into a committee on this bill,
The Earl of Liverpool
said, it was not his intention to go into a long discussion, as the subject of the national debt, so far as regarded the application of a sinking fund, had been frequently under the consideration of the House, though he knew that many persons, who originally supported the principle of a sinking fund, entertained doubts of the correctness of the opinions which they had formerly entertained on the subject. But, being called upon by his public duty to do so, he had particularly turned his attention to the question, and he had never seen any reason to alter the opinion he had formed of the expediency of the measures adopted in 1786, and remodelled in 1792. He wait sure that no person who considered that a war had intervened which had continued for 22 years, could be surprised that all the consequences which had been anticipated had not resulted from the measures then adopted. He did not propose into prove, that the principle had been carried into full effect; but, notwithstanding all that he had heard, he was prepared to assert, that the country had possessed one great means of carrying on the war, by its endeavour to give effect to the principle of the sinking fund. When, however, a period of peace arrived, it became necessary to get rid of the artificial system which had till then been acted upon, to simplify the public accounts, and to establish a real sinking fund upon its only true basis—an excess of income over expenditure. With this view, the
636
l.
l.
l.,
l.
637
l.
638
l.
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, he could not refuse his assent to a bill, by which it was intended, for the first time, to simplify the sinking fund, and place it upon that true foundation on which alone it ought to rest; namely, the surplus of revenue beyond the expenditure. He was himself the first man to suggest to that House the propriety of getting rid of the cumbrous machinery of the sinking fund, after the substance had disappeared; and, though the noble earl had then cautioned him against the danger of the principle he contended for, it was a satisfaction to see the same, noble earl adopting that very principle in his bill, by placing the sinking fund on the only true and intelligible ground upon which it ought ever to have rested Though it was true, that it had been the custom at every period when the subject was reduced into parliament, to praise the sinking fund, to extol the benefit of its
639
640
641
Lord King
insisted, that the present bill contained a manifest delusion. There were, in fact, but three millions applicable to a sinking fund: the remainder was borrowed from posterity. The present was an amphibious sort of measure. It was partly the work of the last, and partly the work of the present chancellor of the exchequer. Its incongruity reminded him of certain animals in New South Wales, which appeared to be part bird and part beast.
Lord Ellenborough
regretted, that the noble lord (Bexley) who had been so long at the head of the exchequer, had not given their lordships the benefit of his opinion on this occasion. He thought with his noble friend, that the real sinking fund was not five, but three millions. If there was a sinking fund of five millions, taxes to that amount might be taken off. But it was clear, that if taxes were taken off to the amount of five millions, the expenditure would exceed the income by two millions. The noble earl had told them that the improvement of the revenue had now, for the first time, enabled government to settle the sinking fund on a firm basis; but, in point of fact, the revenue was smaller now than it had been at many previous periods. It was not, therefore, the increase of revenue alone that enabled their lordships to entertain this measure; it was the diminution of expense, acting in concurrence with the improved state of certain items in the revenue. At the present moment, he conceived their lordships must see the ne-
642
Lord Bexley
thought the establishment of a sinking fund necessary, to prevent any uncertainty with respect to funded property. He defended the plan adopted for getting rid of the half-pay and pensions, and maintained, that there was an actual surplus revenue of 5,000,000
l.
The bill then went through a committee.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday March 21, 1823.
WAREHOUSING BILL.]—
Mr. Wallace
moved the order of the day for going into a committee on this bill.
Mr. Robertson
believed, as far as he had been able to ascertain the general feeling of the commercial interests in this country, that there was not a single exception taken to the principle of this bill. But, though it was of vital consequence to the empire in itself, its machinery was such as would be very likely to destroy all its good effect. The object of the bill was, to allow foreign manufactures and produce to come into our warehouses, and to go out of them again, with the greatest possible facility: so that foreign commerce might be carried on in this country, with greater advantage than it could be in others. The unnecessary caution, however, which government had manifested to secure the revenue, tended to destroy the advantages which would otherwise accrue from it. This was the complex part of the bill—when foreign goods were deposited in our warehouses, those who exported them again were, by law, required to give bond for such exportations taking place; and this was usually done by the merchant, captain, or some other efficient authority. Now, when the vessel in which they were exported was once fairly out of our ports, he conceived that these goods were in just the same situation as if they had never been in our warehouses; and, therefore, that no further protection or precaution; on the part of government, was necessary. So much of the bill as recognized this principle he quite approved of; but the government not content with this, called upon all the other nations of the earth to protect our revenue. Now, what had the merchant of the continent of Europe, or the merchant of
643
Mr. Bright
was very desirous that the committee upon the bill should stand over until after Easter, in order that its provisions might be circulated among those to whom the subject was of great importance.
Mr. Wallace
said, he was not prepared to hear any objections on the score of hon. gentlemen being taken by surprise. The bill had been already printed five times over; and he now proposed the committee in pursuance of a distinct pledge which he had given to an hon. gentleman opposite, that the measure should be brought on at an early period of the session, to give time for mature discussion through all its stages.
Mr. S. Wortley
denied that individuals who were interested in the bill had had sufficient opportunity of ascertaining how far their interests were affected by it. The merchants at Leeds had called a meeting upon the subject, conceiving that a part of the bill was calculated materially to injure them. He was desirous of delay until the result of that meeting should be ascertained.
644
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the bill, with the exception of one clause, was the same as that of last year. That clause was an exception in favour, or, as he should say, in disfavour, of silk and linen goods. The House, last session, had suggested, however, that such a clause should be introduced. Now, he understood the hon. member for Yorkshire to wish that woollens should be included in the same exception; and in that case the hon. member would have ample opportunity to press the introduction of a provision to that effect, in the subsequent stages of the bill. He, nevertheless, conceived that the hon. gentle, man's constituents took a very bad view of their interests.
Mr. K. Douglas
did not conceive there was any ground for apprehension on the part of the persons interested in the woollen trade. We, at present, exported woollens to the amount of 7,000,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Benett,
of Wilts, was persuaded, that the general principle of the bill was excellent. He feared, however, that the framers of it had got into a hobble, by listening to the representations of the persons concerned in the silk-trade. If they persevered in that part of the bill, he should move a similar exemption, in favour of woollens.
Mr. Marryat
considered this bill of the utmost importance to the country. He thought the prejudices which seemed to exist against it very extraordinary. It did not touch our manufactures; but affected only foreign goods that had been brought into our markets. The revenue, which it was calculated took one-fourth of what was earned and expended by every body in the kingdom, was mainly interested in the bill. There was scarcely a kingdom of Europe into which British goods might not be imported, and from which they might not be exported; and the consequence was, that there they could most easily make up assorted cargoes of any description. Hence it had hitherto happened, that foreign merchants had been able to supply foreign markets to much greater advantage than we could.
645
Mr. T. Wilson
said, the reason of the exceptive clause was obvious. Why was the exception made in favour of silk?—because the duties on silk were so enormously high. Why was the exception made in favour of linens?—because the distresses of Ireland had induced the legislature to manifest some feeling for her want of capital. It would be unfair not to extend the same exemption to the woollen trade, as long as it was subjected to the present tax. He agreed with the right hon. gentleman on the general principle of the bill; but he thought it was straining it too far not to allow that there were peculiar cases which ought to be exempted from its operation. If no other member should anticipate him, he would move in the committee, that the word "woollen" should follow the word "linen."
Mr. Philips
said, the exceptions in favour of silks and linen were only made to meet existing prejudices. It was matter of notoriety, that our commerce had suffered seriously in consequence of the want of a more liberal policy. He had made inquiries respecting the woollen trade, and had learned, that it was in a progressive state of improvement, and could maintain a competition in the foreign market. He objected to the tax upon wool as strongly as any man could do, and would support a motion for repealing it; but he could not give his approbation to any measure which should have for its object to continue the law in its present state.
Mr. Dominic Browne
said, he would divide the House, unless the right hon. gentleman would allow the bill to be recommitted after the holidays.
Sir H. Parnell
was of opinion, that the bill would be very beneficial to the Irish trade, as it would make a greater opening for the linen manufactures of that country than at present existed.
Sir J. Newport,
having on former occasions opposed the principle of a free trade, took the earliest opportunity of declaring, that he considered the opinions Which he had formerly entertained upon that subject to be quite erroneous, and had arrived at the conviction, that the trade of Ireland would be greatly improved by throwing it quite open. An opinion in favour of a free trade, was fast gaining around in that country.
Sir. M. W. Ridley
said, that the House
646
Mr. Ricardo
was of opinion, that the bill was founded on a sound and judicious principle, and one which ought to prevail throughout our commercial code. The country was greatly indebted to the right hon. gentleman for his efforts to liberalize the system of trade. It was impossible to make a law which would not interfere with the interests of some classes; but the one before the House, while it was calculated to advance the public welfare, interfered as little as possible with particular interests.
Mr. Hume
called the attention of the right hon. gentleman to the severe duty of 3 per cent, which was levied by the Levant Company, to the great prejudice of the Turkish trade, and hoped he would take that grievance into consideration. As to the bill, it was his opinion, that it ought to have no exceptions. It was favourable to the general interests of the country, and he would therefore give it his decided support.
The House divided: For going into a Committee, 82; Against it, 8.
List of the Minority.
Benett, J.
Sumner, H.
Bright, H.
Tulk, C. A.
Dickinson, W.
Fane, J.
TELLERS.
Grattan, J.
Browne, D.
Smith, W.
Wortley, S.
The House then went into the committee. After some discussion, Mr. S. Wortley's Amendment, that woollens, as well as silks and linens, should be exempted from the operation of the bill, was negative the remaining clauses of the bill were gone through, and the House resumed.
BEER DUTIES ACTS.]—
The House having resolved itself into a committee on these acts,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he did not intend at that late hour to go into the details of the subject which he had to submit to the committee. The course he would now pursue was, to propose certain resolutions for the adoption of the committee. If they were agreed
647
s.
s.
s.
s.
648
s.
s.
d.
1. "That there shall be levied and paid an excise duty of 5
s.
s.
649
d.
2. "That every brewer of such beer or ale shall take out an excise licence, authorizing such persons to brew such beer or ale, and shall pay duty for every such licence at and after the same rate as is by law imposed on excise licences to common brewers of strong beer.
3. "That every seller and retailer of such beer or ale, at any place detached from the entered premises where the same is brewed, and not being sold for consumption on the premises or place where sold, shall take out an excise licence, and shall pay for the same the sum of 1
l.
s.
Alderman Wood,
on behalf of the 48,000 publicans of Great Britain, 2,000 of which were among his constituents, objected to the measure. He thought it particularly hard, that at least these persons, who had altogether 23 millions of property in their leases, houses, furniture, and stock in trade, should not be allowed to sell the beer of the new quality, as well as other people.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he did not mean to prevent brewers from manufacturing beer of the intermediate duality; but it was obvious, that they could not be allowed to do it on the same premises with their old trade. There must be some precautions to secure the revenue.
Mr. Buxton
thought that the measure was one of an inequitable kind. It appeared, however, to be the wish of the agriculturists, the wish of the public, and—what was beyond the other two put together—the wish of the chancellor of the exchequer, that it should pass. The brewers and publicans had, therefore, nothing left, but to yield with the best possible grace. He thought, however, that the right hon. gentleman ought to impose the duty more fairly.
The resolutions were agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, March 24, 1823.
NATIONAL DEBT REDUCTION BILL.]—
On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill,
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, that agreeably to the intimation which he had given, and in order to make the bill what it professed to be, he should move, as an amendment, that the words "five mil-
650
The Earl of Darnley
believed there was a surplus revenue of five millions, but would vote for the amendment, in the hope, that two millions of it might be applied to the reduction of taxation.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that unless the noble marquis meant to negative the arrangement with the Bank, it was impossible to say that there was not a disposable surplus of five millions. The arrangement might be wise or unwise, just or unjust; but nothing could be more futile than the attempt to represent it as something mysterious and fallacious, when, in fact, it was the plainest measure that possibly could be conceived. There was a sum of 4,800,000
l.
Lord King
said, that the only reason given for adopting the sum of five millions was the resolution of the House of Commons; but, when it was recollected, that there had been a resolution of that. House, that paper and gold were equal in value, he thought some better reason should be given for adopting that precise sum.
Lord Bexley
said, the sinking fund now proposed, as compared with the whole debt, was greater than that which. Mr. Pitt had established. He could not see that any injustice would be done to pos-
651
The amendment was negatived, and the bill passed.
KING'S PROPERTY BILL.]—
On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill,
Lord Ellenborough
begged to ask the learned lord on the woolsack for his opinion, as to the right of the king to dispose of the personal chattels of the crown, without an act of parliament.
The Lord Chancellor
, in reply to the question of the noble lord, said, there were two things to be considered; first, the capacity of the donor to give; and secondly, the capacity of the donee to take. If it had been a question as to giving the library to a corporation, such as the Museum, he should have said, that with respect to the personal chattels of the crown, his majesty might dispose of them, if the party to whom they were disposed was capable of taking; but when the question was put, whether the nation could take, and in what manner it was to take, he had thought it right to give some consideration before he replied. With respect to the question generally, his decided opinion was, that his majesty had the power of giving away the personal chattels of the crown in his life-time; and he should say, before the 39th and 40th of the late king, it was at least doubtful whether he could not dispose of them by will. His majesty could originally (as the 39th and 40th of Geo. 3rd contained nothing but enacting clauses) dispose by will of the personal chattels of the crown; and if the chattels were of the description specified in the act (it must be taken as the better opinion), that they could not be disposed of by will. Before the restraining acts of parliament, the power of alienation was supposed to be incidental to being seized in fee, and lands were constantly disposed of by the crown. The lands of the monasteries and abbeys at the time of their suppression, were granted to great families in so liberal a manner as to secure the gratitude of their posterity, as had been often seen; and his majesty might lawfully do it. He used the word lawful as a lawyer, not as a statesman; and in that sense he would say, that the crown might do lawfully in the premises what it was not restrained
652
jus coronœ
Lord Ellenborough
regretted that the learned lord's answer was not so satisfactory as he could have wished. Although entirely incompetent to enter into a legal argument with the learned lord, he must still entertain considerable doubts as to the power of the crown to dispose of personal chattels, in the same manner as a private individual could; and, when a question arose upon such a point, he thought it was their duty to prevent the possibility of abuse with respect to the chattels of the king. In early times the property of the crown was governed upon principles quite distinct from those which regulated the distribution of private effects. From the time of Alfred down through successive reigns, it was held that crown property was inalienable: that it belonged to the kingdom, not to the king. Lord Coke had held that the king could not dispose of the crown jewels, and that they were an heir-loom to the throne. He knew that the common law had made great inroads upon the
jus coronœ
653
l.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he felt it a duty which he owed the sovereign, as well as his majesty's government, to do away the impression conveyed by the speech of the noble lord, as if some trick were intended to be practised by this bill, and as if it were to be ingrafted upon another bill connected with a most liberal gift from his majesty to the public. He would call upon the learned lord on the woolsack, and his other noble friends who were ministers of the crown, to say, whether the present bill was not quite distinct from the transaction of the munificent gift alluded to, and whether it had not been under consideration three years ago, and long before that gift had been thought of. He must lament, that an act which had excited throughout the country almost one universal feeling of gratitude—a transaction which reflected as much honour upon the memory of the late king, who, in the long period of 60 years, had acquired one of the most valuable collections of learning which ever existed in one library, as it did upon his present majesty, who had evinced a willingness to devote such a collection to the public
654
The Lord Chancellor
declared, in the most solemn and unequivocal manner, that there was no connexion between the present bill and that contemplated elsewhere respecting the late king's library. The transactions were wholly distinct.
Lord Redesdale
contended, that until the act of queen Anne, the power of the crown to grant laud had been unlimited. It was true, that when those grants were not approved of, the ministers, by whose advice they had been made, had been impeached; but even then the grants had not been revoked. Why had the act of queen Anne been passed, if the crown had not previously possessed the right of granting lands? But the fact was, that half the lands in the kingdom were holden by, grants from the crown.
The bill was then read a third time.
HOUSE COMMONS.
Monday, March 24, 1823.
ARMY EXTRAORDINARIES—MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES.]—
The report of the committee of supply, to which the army extraordinaries and miscellaneous estimates were referred, were brought up. On the resolution, "That 620,000
l.
655
Mr. Hume
repeated the objections which he had made last year to the expenses of the colonial agents. It had at that time been asserted, that those expenses were paid by the, colonies, and not by the British treasury. Such, however, was not the fact. There was in the present resolution an item of 600
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
Mr. Wilmot
said, he considered the agents of the greatest importance to the colonies and knew that the same opinion
656
Mr. Creevey
directed the attention of the House to the fact, that three of the colonial agents were members of parliament. By the act 6th of Anne, any person accepting a new office was disqualified from holding a seat in, that House. He supposed he should be told, that the act only referred to offices given by the crown. There could not, be a more Jesuitical argument. According to such reasoning, lord Bathurst might fill the house with members holding offices, although the king could not. It was his intention, after the holidays, to, bring forward a proposition upon the subject to obtain a declaration of the meaning of the act of Anne; and if it should appear, that it did not comprehend the case to which he alluded, he would propose to amend it, in order to bring those cases within its reach [Hear!].
Sir J. Yorke
said, he would support the amendment, on the ground of public economy.
Mr. Huskisson
said, that the act of Anne referred only to such appointments as were held directly under, the crown. The colonial agents were paid out of the local revenue, and not out of the crown funds.
The House divided: For the Resolution, 74; For the Amendment, 43.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Boughton, sir W.
Baring, sir T.
Calcraft, J.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Calcraft, J. jun.
Bernal, R.
Caulfield, hon. H.
Blake, sir F.
Cholmeley, sir M.
Boughey, sir J.
Crompton, F.
Birch, J.
Coffin, sir I.
657
Colburne, R.
Pelham, J.C.
Curwen, J. C.
Ridley, sir M. W.
Davies, col.
Ricardo, D.
Fergusson, sir R.C.
Russell, lord J.
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Sefton, earl of
Grattan, J.
Smith, W.
Hamilton, lord A.
Sykes, D.
Lamton, J.G.
Thompson, ald.
Lennard, T. B.
Wilson, T.
Lethbridge, sir T.
Wilson, sir R.
Marjoribanks, S.
Wood, alderman
Martin, John
Wyvill, M.
Newport, sir J.
Yorke, sir J.
Normanby, visc.
TELLERS.
Ord, Wm.
Hume, J.
Palmer, C.
Creevey, T.
On the resolution, "That 62,405
l.
Mr. Hume
rose to ask, whether the contracts for supplying the convicts with clothes, &c. were made by public advertisement? While he was on his legs, he would take the liberty of saying, in consequence of what had fallen from the secretary for the colonies, that he never would shrink, from any charge he had once brought forward. With regard to the case of Mr. Gourlay, he intreated the House to wait until the papers were before them, and then he was confident that the statements of that gentleman would be found correct. He complained that the hon. secretary had said, that he made sweeping allegations against individuals which he could not afterwards support by evidence. With regard to the government of the Ionian Islands, he had said, that sir T. Maitland had been guilty of many unjust and arbitrary acts. What were the proofs which he had adduced? The repeated rebellions which had taken place in those islands, and the increased number of British troops which had been sent there to quell them. He was ready to prove to-morrow, all the allegations he had ever made against sir T. Maitland. If the hon. gentleman thought that he extended those allegations to sir T. Maitland's present conduct, he laboured under a mistake; for he had distinctly said, that within the last four months, there had been a considerable change in the conduct and policy of that officer. He regretted exceedingly, that sir T. Maitland had been permitted to continue so long in the government of those islands; for his conduct had caused the name of an Englishman to be hated by the inhabitants. Instead of being the protector, he had been the scourge and tyrant of the
658
Mr. Dawson
said, that the contracts for clothing the convicts were made openly and publicly.
Mr. Wilmot
said, he understood, that during his absence, the hon. member for Aberdeen had revived the subject of the charges against the governor of Upper Canada. The hon. member had been specifically told, that if he would present a petition from Mr. Gourlay, and bring forward a direct measure upon it, be would be met in the fullest and most distinct manner. What the hon. member desired more he could not understand. With regard to those reiterated, vague; and general attacks upon the character and conduct of sir T. Maitland, he proms Nested against them, and he hoped the House would support him in so doing.—The hon. member said, that there had been a change of policy in sir T. Maitland's administration within the last four months. In reply to that, he challenged the hon. member to show any act of sir Thomas's government, during those four months, which differed from the acts of the previous eight months. According tee the hon. member, the people of the islands were only kept down by the sword. He would state a few simple circumstances to the House; and would then ask, whether it was possible that this could be the fact? In the island of Corfu there were, at present, only 1,900 British troops. When the French occupied it there were 12,000. In that island there were 25,000 men capable of bearing arms. Was it likely that these 1,900 men could' keep down a hostile population to such an amount? In Cephalonia the British troops did not exceed 500 men, whilst the population capable of bearing arms amounted to 35,000. In Santa Maura the British troops did not exceed 350 men, whilst the population capable of bearing arms amounted to 15,000. In the other islands there were not above 60 British soldiers. He would, therefore, ask the hon. member, whether he meant to say that the inhabitants of the Ionian Islands were kept down by such a mere handful of troops? If he did, was he not, by representing them as tamely submitting to this thraldom, degrading the parties in whose favour he pretended to come forward? The hon. member had also objected to the occupation of these islands, on the ground of the
659
l.
l.
vivâ voce,
660
Mr. Grey Bennet
was convinced, that the beneficial changes which had recently been effected in the Ionian Islands, would never have been brought about, if his hon. friend had not directed the attentions of parliament to the subject. It was true the House had negatived the accusations brought against sir T. Maitland; but every body who had been in the Ionian Islands admitted, that he had contrived to make the British name absolutely odious and detested. This fact had never been denied but by a succession of under, secretaries, who seemed to have a refining fee to defend in that House the conduct of every governor.
Mr. Secretary Peel
observed, that no part of the speech of the hon. member for Aberdeen had surprised him more than his protest against sweeping and general accusations. When the member brought forward charges against absent individuals, he must be prepared to hear those charges repelled with warmth. He could not conceive a situation more delicate than that of an officer, in the discharge of arduous and painful duties, liable to such attacks and charges as the hon. member had thought proper to make. He considered his hon. friend to be quite justified in the warmth he had expressed, at the charges vaguely brought forward against sir T. Maitland. For what were those charges? Why, such as, if true, must cause the dismissal of that gallant officer. He had been called scourge and a tyrant, and a disgrace to the British name. Was it fair that such attacks should be made upon question like that now before the House, an without even giving the accused or his friends the advantage of a notice? On such an occasion, his hon. friend had been imperiously called upon to vindicate sir T. Maitland. Having for two years filled the office now so worthily occupied by his hon. friend, he begged to bear his testimony to the character of sir T. Maitland, Never had there lived a man actuated by a more sincere desire to promote the honour of the British name.
661
Lord A. Hamilton
contended, that a public man was liable to have his conduct Canvassed, and that the charges against sir T. Maitland were made against his public acts, and against his government. When he first heard the statements of his hon. friend, the impression upon his mind was, either that they were not true, or that sir T. Maitland must be removed from his government. There was one case, the infamy of which must rest either upon sir T. Maitland or the government. He meant the case of Martinengo, who was sentenced to ten years imprisonment. He would defy the whole talent of the Treasury-bench to tell what the charge against him was. If the government had not disclaimed that act, why had they thought proper to remit the sentence? The right hon. secretary of state had no right to say, that personal and vague charges were made against sir T. Maitland.
Mr. Wynn
thought the manner which these charges had been brought forward against sir T. Maitland was most extraordinary, most unjust, and most illiberal. The noble lord and the hon. member objected to the charges being described as personal, and yet sir T. Maitland was called a "scourge" and a "tyrant." The hon. member had thrown out his vague accusations, upon an occasion when no decision could be come to by the House upon them. Let him bring forward a distinct motion and specific charges, and then would be the time for meeting him with evidence to disprove his statements.
The resolution was agreed to.
BEER DUTIES BILL.]—
The report of the committee on the Beer Duties acts being brought up,
Mr. H. Sumner
expressed his doubt that abuses might be practised under the provisions of the bill. A brewer making the new description of beer might keep a house in which persons could drink it; and thus, in fact, maintain a public house without holding a licence.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that no man keeping a public-house would be allowed to brew the new beer on his premise. There was a clause, providing that a bublican who wished to brew within a certain distance of the house which he used as a public-house.
Mr. Alderman Wood
said, that the bill professed to give the poor man a cheap
662
Mr. Alderman Thompson
approved of the measure, as he thought it would enable the poorer classes to get malt liquor cheaper than they could at present. This reconciled him to the bill; though he did not deny, that it might slightly affect the public brewers and publicans.
Mr. Alderman Smith
thought it was desirable to get the public houses out of the hands of the brewers.
Mr. Benett,
of Wilts, though he approved of the principle of the bill, thought it would be difficult to carry its details into effect. He preferred a malt to a beer tax; though his own personal interest would be affected by the former. He should be glad to find that the sale of beer was legalized, like that of all other commodities. This would promote the comfort of the labouring classes; who would thus be enconraged to send for their beer, and consume it with their families, instead of wasting their time, their money, and their health, in public-houses.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he did not bring forward this measure as one free from objections; but, as the principle of the bill seemed to be gene rally admitted, he hoped a fair trial would be given to it.
Mr. Grattan
wished the plan to be extended to Ireland, where a good beer, sold at a reasonable price, might, in some measure, supersede the use of spirits.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that there was no beer duty in Ireland.
Mr. Grattan
said, he looked to the effect of having beer sold, without the necessity of a public-house licence.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
thought the sale of beer, without a licence, in Ireland, was a matter worthy of consideration.
Mr. W. Williams
thought the provisions of the bill could be better carried into effect by an
ad valorem
Mr. F. Lewis
thought it would be perfectly practicable to impose a duty,
ad valorem,
663
Mr. F. Buxton
objected to the measure, on the ground, that it imposed an unfair duty on the brewers, whose capitals were already embarked in the trade, while a lower rate of duty was imposed on the new race of brewers, which the bill was calculated to encourage.
The resolutions were agreed to.
MERCHANT VESSELS APPRENTICESHIP
The report of this bill being brought up,
MT. Ricardo
said, he objected altogether to the principle of the bill. He thought it was a maxim, that no person ought to be controlled in his own arrangements, unless such control, was rendered necessary by paramount political circumstances. Now, no such necessity could be shown in support of this bill. In his opinion, it would not be more unjust to enact a law, that every surgeon should take a certain number of apprentices, to encourage the progress of surgical science, than it would be to pass this bill, rendering it imperative on the masters of merchant vessels to take a given number of apprentices, in order to encourage the increase of efficient seamen. He denied this bill would cause an addition of one seaman to the number now in the service. So long as there was employment for seamen, there would be encouragement enough for them; and when there was not, those who were now here, would resort to foreign countries for employ. The only effect of the bill would be, to reduce the wages of seamen; and that alone would render it objectionable. He would move, to leave out from the word "repealed," to remove the compulsory condition for taking a certain number of apprentices from the bill.
Mr. Huskisson
agreed, that whenever any measure, interfering between employers and the individuals employed, was proposed, some strong necessity or political expediency ought to be shown for
664
Mr. Sykes
complained of the great haste with which the bill was proceeded in, to the utter prevention of his constituents from informing themselves as to its nature and extent. He had hoped, that all new restraints upon commerce were at an end.
Sir G. Coekburn
said, that the principal merchants and ship-owners had been consulted as to the expediency of this measure, and that all had considered it as a boon extended to the interest with which they were connected. By the protection afforded under this bill, apprentices in merchant vessels might now, for the first time, become second and first mates, without being liable to impressment.
Mr. Marryat
said, he had been for forty years extensively engaged in the shipping trade, and the experience hell had derived from this circumstance, induced him to give his hearty support to the bill. It was, with him, a rule never to advance any seaman, unless he had served regularly by apprenticeship. Much had been urged respecting a free trade, and the advantage of removing all restriction; but if the opinions of the advocates for non-restriction were pushed to their full extent, horses would not be broken in, nor children be made to go to school, for these were restrictions. Buonaparté had once said, that if he had a throne of adamant, he believed the politi-
665
Mr. Bernal
was unfavourable to the principle of the bill; but, as the amendment, if carried, would take away the benefit given by the bill, of extending the exemption from impressments, he trusted his hon. friend would not press it.
Mr. Gladstone
supported the bill, and concurred in the statement, that it had received the unqualified approbation of the ship-owners.
Sir I. Coffin
approved of the bill, not only because it afforded additional protection to the merchant service, but because it was calculated to maintain the naval strength of the country.
Mr. Bright
expressed his approbation of the bill, which was, however, rather a modification of the existing law, than a new measure; for, by the 2nd and 3rd of Anne, which had never been repealed, masters of all vessels, of above 30 tons, were bound to take one or more apprentices, according to the rate of tonnage.
Mr. Hume
recommended his hon. friend to persevere in his opposition to a measure which was about as useful and politic as a statute of one of the Edwards for the better stuffing of feather-beds. There was as little reason for the regulations imposed by this bill on the masters of merchant vessels, as there was in that instance for an interference with the craft of the upholsterers. If the bill were to pass into a law, the effect would be to man the whole of the merchant ships with apprentices. It had been alleged, that seamen were scare and wages high, and that this bill would tend to increase the numbers and diminish the rate of wages. But, if it were true, that the supply of seamen was not at present equal to the demand, the well-known principle would draw more men to the employment. The chief objection to the bill, however, was the principle of compulsion, by which it was supposed that seamen would be taught their duty. Now, it was well known, that we had had the very best of seamen without the operation of any such principle; and if so, coercion could do nothing but harm. This coercive system would, in fact, create a supply beyond the demand, and could not fail of being mischievous. His hon. friend did not
666
The House then divided: For the Amendment, 6; Against it, 85.
List of the Minority.
Bennet, hon. H.G.
Wyvill, M.
Grenfell, Pascoe
Smith, Robert
TELLERS.
Sykes, D.
Ricardo, D.
Whitmore, W.W.
Hume, J.
WAREHOUSING BILL.]—
On the motion of Mr. Wallace, this bill was recommitted.
Mr. Grattan
objected to that part of the bill which allowed of the warehousing of foreign linens, without the paying of a transit duty, as most injurious to the staple trade of Ireland.
Mr. Wallace
did not wish to prejudge any part of the question. He did not consider himself as pledged to any one side; but he thought that those who objected to the bill were bound to ant out the injury that it would do.
Sir G. Hill
complained that, after what had been done with respect to Ireland last year, sufficient notice had not been given to enable the persons interested in the subject to offer their opposition to the measure. Notwithstanding this, it was now proposed to legislate in their absence, and he could not help thinking it was unfair. He complained particularly of the hardship which the enforcement of transit duty would be upon the Irish manufacturers.
Mr. Wallace
deprecated the imputation of unfairness. He had stated last year, that if Ireland was to be exempted the it must not be considered as a permanent exemption. The only ground upon which the exemption had then been made was, the distressed situation of the country, and the inconvenience of bringing the matter under discussion. He was willing to give every reasonable time, and he thought that the 21st of April would afford time enough to convey hither the grounds of the opposition which the manufacturers of Ireland proposed to make to the bill.
Mr. S. Rice
thought the course pursued by his right hon. friend was the just one. He contended that the general principle was in his favour, and he left it to those who opposed him to make out the special case on which they relied.
667
Mr. Secretary Peel
stated, that what his right hon. friend had done, was given rather as a notice than as a final decision. The question of the linen-trade of Ireland appeared to him to proceed on a distinct and peculiar principle, and could not be considered with reference to the general principle by which the commerce of this country was regulated. The point to be looked to was, how the linen-trade could best be extended and supported, so as to render the greatest portion of benefit to the people of Ireland. He viewed that trade with much interest, not only because it was intimately connected with the peace and tranquillity of Ireland, but because it was associated with certain historical recollections. The linen-trade was given to Ireland by a great monarch. Every thing was done to discourage the woollen-trade of Ireland, and to encourage that of England; but at the same time a solemn promise was given that the linen-trade of Ireland should be fostered and encouraged. When the subject came to be discussed, he should approach it with these feelings.
Mr. Wallace
then moved several amendments to the bill; which were agreed to.
RIOT AT THE DUBLIN THEATRE.]—
Colonel Barry
said, he rose to move for the production of certain papers relative to the subject matter of a discussion which was to take place on the 15th of next month. He was induced to do so, because he thought it of great importance, that all documents tending to throw light on that question, should be previously before the House. The paper he would first move for was, a Copy of the information on which was grounded the committal of some persons to the Gaol of Newgate, in Dublin, on a charge of a Conspiracy to murder the Lord Lieutenant. He would state the particulars of the transaction as they took place. On the 14th of December, the transaction to which he alluded originated. On the day after, some persons were taken up, and brought before the police magistrates; two were charged with a conspiracy to riot, and committed to Newgate, on a committal specifying only the simple crime of riot or conspiracy to riot. Those two persons, named Hanbridge and Graham, were committed to Newgate on the 23rd of December. After a little time, warrants of detainer were lodged, charging them with a conspiracy "to kill and murder" the lord-
668
ex-officio,
nolle prosequi,
ex-officio
669
Mr. Plunkett
said, that so far as he was personally concerned in this question, he was desirous that every document should be brought before the House and the public; but whatever individual feelings he might entertain, he could not submit to the establishment of a precedent subversive of the ends of justice. He acknowledged the temper of propriety with which the right hon. member had brought forward his motion: he must suppose that he was actuated by a zeal for justice: he must suppose, that no individual object mixed itself with the subject, and that it was not brought forward from any union of views with the class of persons who were the objects of prosecution: he must, in courtesy, suppose, that it was brought forward, not with any view to embarrass the Irish government, or the humble individual now before the House. But, though he was not at liberty to find fault with the motives of the right hon. member, he must complain of the effects. It would be in the recollection of the House, that the hon. member for Armagh (Mr. Brownlow) had moved for the production of papers relative to the committal of the same persons. That hon. member had moved for copies of the bills of indictment which had been ignored by the grand jury, as well as for copies of the
ex-officio
ex-officio
670
671
jeu d'esprit
672
673
674
675
Dr. Lushington
denied the correctness of the opinion which had been just expressed by the attorney-general for Ire-
676
677
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that the question was, whether certain informations, upon which the magistrates had committed some persons, accused, in those informations, of a conspiracy to murder the king's representative, should be placed before the House? He must say, that he did consider a great part of the hon. and learned gentleman's speech had been completely beside this question. These were
ex-officio
678
Mr. Abercromby
agreed with the right hon. secretary, that the real question was confined in a narrow compass, but differed from him in the opinion, that the present motion was not connected with that of the hon. member for Armagh. They both referred to the same subject. The motion of the hon. member for Armagh did not turn upon the legality of the act, which the attorney-general for Ireland had done, but upon the constitutional exercise of the power which he possessed. This being the case, the whole of the proceedings connected with the exercise of that power in filing of the
ex-officio
679
Sir J. Newport
was of opinion, that the papers ought not to be produced, because their production might tend to obstruct the course of justice. He did not think them necessary to enable the House to come to a just decision upon the question. The reasoning of his learned friend who had just sat down, amounted to nothing more than this—that the House having already embarked in error, ought to proceed in that course. The motion was liable to a strong objection, which did not apply to the former motion; namely, that by the production of the papers, third parties would be liable to have actions brought against them, and to the infliction of penalties. He should vote against it.
Lord A. Hamilton
could not see why the production of the documents should be opposed by the friends of the magistrates, unless it was because those individuals had acted improperly.
Mr. Spring Rice
said, that the question involved in the present motion was, whether Ireland should continue to be governed by law, or be thrown hack again into the arms of that detestable faction from which it had been recently delivered. If the House wished to rescue that country from the unfortunate state of division in which it had been placed, it ought not, directly or indirectly, to countenance that party in Ireland which considered itself aggrieved, not by the particular transaction to which the motion referred, but by the whole conduct of the existing Irish government, and by the principle of conciliation on which it proceeded. He was sorry to hear the manner in which the intentions of the rioters in the Dublin theatre had been spoken of. Much ridicule had been attempted to be thrown on their proceedings, by a recurrence to the words "rattle" and "bottle." He hoped that the object of the parties would not he lost sight of, in consequence of the attempt which was made to attach ridicule to the instruments which they had employed.
Mr. Grattan
professed himself such a lover of publicity, in all cases where the
680
ex-officio
Dr. Phillimore
complained, that his right hon. friend had been unfairly dealt with by the clandestine manner in which this serious charge had been brought forward. The real question before the House was, whether the king's benevolent intention to promote peace and conciliation was to be carried into effect,
bonâ fide,
Mr. Lambton
said, that if he could persuade himself that only object of the present motion was to afford a triumph to a faction in Ireland, he would give a different vote to that which he intended to give. But he could not understand how that could in any way be construed to be the object and end of the motion. Was the House to be told; that because faction existed to a lamentable extent in Ireland, they were not to inquire into a particular case of abuse in the administration of justice in that country, when it was brought under their notice? If that doctrine were recognized, there would be and end to all law—there would be an end to the confidence which the people placed in the House of Commons as the ultimate tribunal of justice. In his opinion, a
primà facie
681
Lord Hotham
said, he would vote for the motion, as it did not appear that any inconvenience would arise from the production of the papers.
Colonel Trench
declared himself in favour of the motion, but not as an Orangeman. Those societies he considered destructive of the public tranquillity.
Colonel Barry,
in reply, defended himself from the charge of having taken the attorney-general by surprise, as he had submitted the motion to hint on Wednesday, as well as to the secretary for Ireland, before his departure. He disclaimed all wish of governing Ireland, by dividing its inhabitants into factions. He was as sincere a friend to conciliation as any man; but he was, nevertheless, of opinion, that Ireland could not be conciliated without justice being administered equally to all parties. He could wish that there were neither Orangemen nor United Irishmen Ireland; but, as those associations had been mentioned, be must beg leave to say, that the Orange societies were founded upon principles which partook much more of the na-
682
The House divided: Ayes, 32; Noes, 48.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Lambton, J. G.
Baring, sir T.
Marjoribanks, S.
Bright, H.
O'Neil, hon. J.
Boughey, sir J. F.
Pares, T.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Philips, G. sen.
Claughton, T.
Pakenham, hon. R.
Colborne, N. R.
Robarts, G.
Creevey, T.
Sefton, earl of
Downie, R.
Tulk, C. A.
Duncannon, visc.
Thompson, ald.
Fergusson, sir R.
Trench, F.
Fane, J.
Wilson, sir R.
Grattan, J.
Wells, J.
Hart, G.
Williams, W.
Haldimand, W.
Hotham, lord
TELLERS.
Hamilton, lord A.
Barry, right hon. J.
Hume, T.
Lushington, Dr.
MILITARY AND NAVAL PENSIONS
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that, as the act of the last session had only given the trustees of naval and military pensions the power of making agreements for the sale of them from year to year, and as, by some inexplicable omission, it had not given them the power of making au agreement for the sale of them for a term of years, he now canoe forward, to ask for leave to bring in a bill to remedy that omission. He did not know whether, under such circumstances, it would be necessary for him to trouble the House with an account of the bargain which the trustees had recently made, for sale of part of those annuities; as, however, the hour was a late one, he would confine himself to merely moving for leave to bring in a bill "to confirm an Agreement entered into by the Trustees, under an act of the last session, for apportioning the burthen occasioned by the Military and Naval Pensions and Civil Superannuations, with the Governor and Company of the Bank of England."
Mr. Baring
said, that, as no agreement with the Bank of such a nature as that to which allusion had just been made, could be concluded without the sanction of parliament, and, as the first vote of the House in favour of it, was generally considered to give such sanction, leave to bring in the bill should not be given as a mere matter of course. He, therefore, suggested the propriety of introducing this bill in a committee of the whole House.
683
Mr. Grenfell
said, that, as this transaction went to raise money by way of loan, it ought to be introduced in a committee of the whole House. As to the bargain which had been made with the Bank, he should certainly object to it; not that he considered it at all unfair for the Bank to accept it; but he thought it would be more advantageous to the public, for the commissioners for the reduction of the national debt to take the management of those annuities into their own hands.
The Speaker
said, he thought there was no occasion for going into a committee of the whole House, for the purpose of introducing this bill. The present act of parliament enabled the trustees to make the bargain from year to year it was dear, therefore, that they had the power of making it for the present year. The bill which the chancellor of the exchequer now wished to introduce, was to enable government to make the bargain for five years; and was, therefore, only a bill to amend the existing act. The reason why the House went into a committee upon a loan, was, that the loan was generally raised for the service of the current year. Now, the trustees had received power to sell annuities for the present year; and, therefore, he was of opinion, that the bill might be introduced without going into a Committee.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
ARUNDEL ELECTION—MR. PARKINS'S RECOGNIZANCES.]—
Mr. Hume
said, he had a petition to present from Mr. Joseph Wilfrid Parkins. The petition stated, that the petitioner had that day attended at the House, to enter into the requisite recognizances to prosecute his petition against the election of Mr. Kemp, for the borough of Arundel, accompanied by one of his sureties, Joseph Stevenson, and his agent, Henry Taylor; but that his other surety did not attend The petition went on to declare, that, in consequence of the representations made by the petitioner and his agent, the consideration of the validity of his recognizances was postponed till eight o'clock that evening; that at that hour he again attended, with one of the sureties; but that the other, whose name was Wm. Harris, did not even then appear, and, as the petitioner verily believed, voluntarily refused to attend. The petitioner, therefore, prayed the House to extend the time for his entering into recognizances. The act was impera-
684
Sir T. Baring
was of opinion, that no grounds had been laid for the indulgence requested. He understood that a letter had been received from Mr. Harris, who was an auctioneer, stating, that he was that day attending the appraisement of goods, and that it was therefore quite impossible that he could spare time to attend the House.
Mr. Wynn
contended, that it was quite impossible for the House to accede to the prayer of the petition. The petition did not contain any allegation that Mr. Harris had promised to attend. If petitions so loosely worded were once admitted as just grounds for extending the time of entering into recongnizances, the 14 days allowed might always be enlarged to 28; as it would be easy to state that a surety had refused to attend at the time and place which the act specified.
Mr. Hume
said, he had asked Mr. Parkins whether he had any written document, from which it could be shown, that Mr. Harris had undertaken to become his surety. Mr. Parkins replied in the negative; but added, that both his sureties had voluntarily offered to become so. The hon. member concluded by moving, that the time for entering into recognizances be extended till that day week.
The motion not being seconded, fell to the ground. After which, the order of the day for taking into consideration the petition against the return of Mr. Kempt, was discharged.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, March 25, 1823.
CAPE BRETON—PETITION COMPLAINING OF UNION WITH NOVA SCOTIA.—
Mr. Hume
said, he held in his hand a petition from a numerous body of the freeholders and others of the town of Sydney, in the island of Cape Breton, which he considered to be most important, involving, as it did, principles not confined to Cape Breton, but applicable to every colony in his majesty's dominions. That the House might better understand the prayer of the petition, it was necessary to recall to their minds that, at the close of the war of 1763, certain colonies were
685
686
687
l.
l.
688
l.
Mr. Wilmot
observed, that if; as the hon. member had stated, this petition involved a great constitutional question, it would have been better to have given notice of a specific motion, than to have entered into it at such length on presenting the petition. He thought, however, he should be able to convince the hon.
689
690
Mr. Bernal
strongly urged the claims of the petitioners to the attention of the House. It could not be contended, upon the proclamation of 1763, that Cape Breton was put on a different footing from the other ceded colonies. It would be quite as legal to deprive Grenada of its separate assembly as to unite Cape Breton to Nova Scotia. The hon. secretary had said, that the people had no grievances to complain of. Was it no grievance to be taxed for the debt of Nova Scotia; that their metallic currency should be withdrawn, and that they should be inundated with a depreciated paper currency? Was it no grievance that the laws of inheritance were altered? If the colonists had made no communication to the colonial office, it was probably because they thought that representation in that quarter would be of no use.
Mr. Bright
said, that this was a question which involved the interest of all the colonies. The treatment of Cape Breton was one of extreme injustice. That colony was important from its situation; it was one of the fortresses of England; it commanded the entrance of the Great St. Lawrence and the fishery Newfoundland; and it was, therefore, an obvious matter of policy to see that the inhabitants were attached to Great Britain by justice and by kindness. The rights of the colonies should be protected, whether they were founded on English law, or on long usage.
Mr. Hume
defended the colonists from the charge of delay. A meeting of the inhabitants had taken place at Sydney,
691
Ordered to lie on the table.
FRANCE AND SPAIN—GUARANTEE OF
Lord John Russell,
adverting to the war which was apparently about to commence between France and Spain, observed, that it was highly important the House should be informed of the true situation of this country, with regard to the approaching contest. He therefore begged to ask the right hon. secretary, whether there were any stipulations, in any treaties, by which this country guaranteed the throne of France to Louis the 18th, and his successors?
Mr. Canning
replied, that in a matter of a nature so grave, he would not return a positive answer, as he could not recall to his memory all the treaties, with all their stipulations, which might exist. There was, however, a stipulation in existence, by which any attempt made to resume the crown of France by any members of the family of the late usurper was to be resisted by all the great powers of Europe. There was also a stipulation, that, in the event of a rebellion breaking out in France, Austria, Russia, and England, should meet, and concert the measures necessary to be taken.
Lord John Russell
said, he considered that the invasion of Spain by the Bourbons totally altered our relations with France. After Great Britain had spent, it appeared fruitlessly, no less than a thousand millions, in the hope that the re-establishment of that family would secure the blessings of peace to Europe, it was now incumbent on the government of this country to clear itself of all stipulations which might involve it in still further expense for the support of that family.
Sir R. Wilson
said, he had formerly put a similar question to a late noble lord, and had received from him a positive assurance, that we had not guaranteed the throne of France to the Bourbons. He hoped the right hon. gentleman would
692
Mr. Canning
said, he had been asked as to a fact, and had not given an opinion He had observed, that in case of an attempt to restore the family of the usurper, the allies were bound to act in concert against it; and he had further stated, that in case of rebellion or other revolutions, the allies were only bound to meet and consult together.
CIVIL LIST—FOREIGN EMBASSIES.—
Mr. Lennard
rose to bring forward his motion relative to the Foreign Embassies. Similar information to that which he now meant to move for had been before laid on the table of the House. His intention was to ground a motion upon it for further reduction in the third class of the civil list. If a report which was in circulation was true, the mission to the Swiss Cantons was about to be reduced. This proved the benefit of public discussion. That gross job would never have been abolished but for the notice taken of it in that House. The sum voted for this branch of expenditure was greater than all the secret service money. He would, therefore, move, "That there be laid before this House, a Return of any decrease of expense, since the 2nd of May, 1822, that has taken place in the Third Class of the Civil List; and stating whether such decrease, if any, has been occasioned by a diminution in the number of persons employed on Embassies, or by an alteration of the rank of persons so employed, or otherwise."
Mr. Secretary Canning
trusted, that the grounds on which he should oppose the motion would appear satisfactory to the House. The hon. member was aware, that any saving which might be made in this branch of expenditure was by law directed to be carried to the account of the consolidated fund. It necessarily followed, that the amount of that saving appeared, in due course, in the papers laid before parliament. He fully admitted the right of the House to watch over the expenditure of the crown; but he thought it would not be a wise exercise of that right to call upon the crown to state every specific appointment, and in fact the grounds of every alteration, in the arrangements of this, department. This, indeed, would be put the House in the place of the executive. He was ready to admit, that certain changes were
693
Lord John Russell
supported the motion, and contended that the House would act inconsistently in not agreeing to it, as it had agreed to the motion of last year, which had called for the return already before the House. He was glad to hear that the embassy to Switzerland was to be reduced. When that subject was discussed last year, the minority were few in number; but the projected reduction proved, that a minority were sometimes in the right.
Mr. Hume
trusted the right hon. secretary would not press his opposition to this motion. His predecessor in office had not refused a similar return. If the right hon. gentleman really wished for a fair discussion of the motion to be hereafter made by his hon. friend, he would not refuse the required information. Without it, his hon. friend, in arguing upon the expense of any particular embassy, might he met by a statement, that that embassy had been reduced, since the papers now before the House had been presented. If he persisted in refusing the information, the House would know what it had to expect from the candor of the right hon. gentleman in future.
Mr. Huskisson
objected to the motion. A report would hereafter he laid on the table of the House, which would enable them to judge of the reductions and of the savings which had been made. By law, these savings were all carried to the consolidated fund. It had been a principle laid down by Mr. Fox, that the
694
Sir F. Burdett
said, that as prophets had no honour in their own country, so great men were rarely quoted till after they were dead, and then they had generally the misfortune to be misquoted. He could not say exactly what Mr. Fox had stated, but he was quite sure he never could have laid down the principle attributed to him by the right hon. gentleman. What Mr. Fox had said was probably this—that it never had been customary for parliament to interfere with the private expenses of the royal family. The present question had no other object but to procure certain information respecting one branch of our enormous expenditure. On this subject, there seemed to be something like sympathy between our government and that of France, to which our ministers always appealed when they were endeavouring to justify their own extravagance. But what must be thought when, after all this enormous expenditure, this country seemed deprived of all influence abroad? Was it not time to call on parliament to examine how these sums were employed? This was a part, of the civil list over which the House ought to keep a most watchful eye. It was the duty of that House, and particularly at the present moment, when the character of the country had been so de-
695
The House divided: Ayes, 24; Noes, 50.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Lushington, S.
Bennet, hon. G.
Martin, J.
Bernal, R.
Ord, W.
Blake, sir F.
Palmer, C. F.
Bright, H.
Philips, G.
Burdett, sir F.
Poyntz, J.
Davies, col.
Ricardo, D.
Denison, W.
Rice, S.
Fergusson, sir R.
Scott, J.
Glenorchy, lord
Sykes, D.
Grattan, J.
Wood, alderman
Hartopp, G.
Hobhouse, J. C.
TELLERS.
Hume, J.
Lennard, T. B.
Knight, R.
Russell, lord J.
CASE OF COLONEL HOME.—
Mr. Grey Bennet
said, he rose to move for Copies of the Proceedings of a Court of Inquiry on colonel Home, of the Third Regiment of Guards. The case of that officer was, in his opinion, one of great importance; and, though he might despair of succeeding in the application which he felt it his duty to make to the House, he did not despair of the success, which would arise from the impression which that officer's case could not fail to make upon the public. Having obtained information, which he believed to be correct, he felt himself called upon, in justice to the character of that injured officer, and to the institutions of the army, to bring his case under the consideration of the House. It was necessary to premise, that this officer was not undistinguished in the military history of the country. He entered the service in 1803, had served in the Peninsula, in Germany, and wherever his regiment was engaged; and in the last great conflict at Waterloo, had conspicuously distinguished himself, in that post which was technically and emphatically called the key of the position—the post of Hogoumont. This officer, when he returned home, had the misfortune to engage in an unprofitable mining concern, relying upon representations, which sub-
696
697
698
699
700
Lord Palmerston
said, he would leave the military character of colonel Home out of view, as it had really as little to do with the present question, as that question, in his opinion, had with parliamentary inquiry. The case was as plain as it was brief. Colonel Home had entered into a certain mercantile speculation; and, when he found that speculation was not likely to be profitable, he had attempted to withdraw his capital, by means which had been thought unjustifiable. He had become a partner by purchasing shares; and that he was ignorant of the terms of the co-partnery, would have been no excuse for his conduct, seeing that he ought to have informed himself of the grounds upon which he had invested his capital. Finding that the speculation was not likely to turn out well, he had attempted, in the manner which had been stated, to withdraw his capital. The whole capital was 27,000
l.,
l.
701
702
The motion was negatived.
NEWFOUNDLAND LAWS BILL.—
Mr. Wilmot
moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend the laws in Newfoundland. It was his intention to have the bill printed, and to take the debate upon the second reading. The bill had three general objects; first, the amendment of the laws respecting the fisheries; second, the improvement of the courts of justice; and lastly, the institution of a local power to make bye laws under certain circumstances.
Sir J. Newport
considered the proposition to be of a novel nature, since it went to supply an improved system of judicature, while it left that which was defective to exist at the same time.
Mr. Bright
thought, before they proceeded to legislate on this subject, that more information, as to the state of the colony, ought to be afforded.
Dr. Lushington
said, there never had been a colony, so neglected as that of Newfoundland. He wished to know whether the details, of a measure which affected the concerns of 60,000 persons,
703
Mr. Wilmot
said, that the measure was brought in upon the responsibility of government.
Mr. M. A. Taylor
said, he felt deeply for the interests of Newfoundland, and would rejoice at the introduction of any measure likely to tend to her prosperity; but he thought the root of the evil which was destroying that colony had been laid in the last treaty with America; which; by allowing the Americans to fish in the waters and to dry their fish on the coast, had occasioned the loss of almost the whole trade to Newfoundland, as the Americans, by their local advantages, were enabled to undersell the British merchants.
Mr. Hume
thought, that a bill which went to change the internal economy of the settlement, ought not to have been proposed but upon information adduced before a committee. If the people of the colony had made complaints of the existing system of law, those complaints ought to be laid on the table; and if they had not complaints, he did not see what necessity ministers had to legislate in the dark, in a case which affected the interest of a population of 60,000 souls.
Mr. Tulk
described the island of Newfoundland to be in a state of absolute ruin. A measure so important as the present, ought not only to be made well known to those connected with Newfoundland in this country, but time ought to be afforded to make the inhabitants acquainted with its provisions.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that if the trade of Newfoundland was ruined by the last treaty concluded with America, he was the guilty person; as he had signed that treaty. He alluded not to the treaty of Ghent, but to that of 1818. He did not consider the effect of that treaty to be such as had been described. The House, however, ought to bear in mind the circumstances under which it was concluded. A question of great delicacy and importance was then under discussion, which was this, whether the fact of a declaration of war having since taken place, altered the rights which had been given to America by the treaty of 1783? On the part of America, it was contended, that the re-establishment of peace between the two countries,
ipso facto,
704
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
FORGERY BILL.—
Dr. Lushington
rose to move for leave to bring in a bill to amend the laws respecting Forgery. He wished to correct certain defective enactments, but did not propose to alter the punishment of the crime. He did not wish to inflict capital punishment where it was not at present inflicted, nor to take it away from those crimes to which it was now applied. He proposed, however, to make certain offences penal which could not be punished at present. The destruction of a will was one of these. That offence was not properly provided against at present; yet the crime was not one of rare occurrence. His intention was to bring in the bill, in order that it might stand over to next session. The learned member concluded by moving, "for leave to bring in a bill to consolidate, amend, and declare certain general provisions relating to the crime of Forgery."—"—The motion was agreed to.
REVENUE DEPARTMENT CONSOLIDATION
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that after the able report of the commissioner of inquiry, but remained for him, offer on the subject
705
Sir J. Newport
expressed his satisfaction at the prospect of a change, which he was confident would be attended with great advantage both to the revenue and the merchants.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, March 26, 1823.
BANKRUPT LAWS.]—
The Lord Chancellor
observed, that towards the end of last session, he had laid upon the table a bill for the amendment of the Bankrupt Laws. Since that period he had thought it better that the whole of the bankrupt laws should be consolidated into one act, and a bill had been prepared for that purpose, embodying all those laws (including the bill he had presented last session), with the exception of clauses which it was thought might conveniently be repealed, and with some amendments. From the nature of some of the clauses contained in this consolidation bill, it was doubtful whether it could originate in that House, or whether it must not be first presented to the House of Commons; but, on an early day after the
706
NEGOCIATIONS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.]—
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that unless any circumstance occurred of which at present he did not foresee the probability, he proposed on Monday the 14th of April, to lay upon the table the papers respecting the late negociations with reference to the state of affairs between France and Spain; he also proposed at the same time, to make a statement containing the general outline of the policy pursued by the government with regard to these negociations. It was not, however, his intention to call upon the House for any premature decision upon the subject. The papers would be printed and placed in the hands of the members of the House; and it would be for their lordships to decide, after having perused them, whether any and what course should be adopted respecting them.
The Earl Grey
said, he had heard what had been stated by the noble earl with the deepest regret and concern, as it appeared that all hopes were very nearly, if not quite extinguished of averting hostilities between Spain and France. With respect to the course proposed by the noble earl, it certainly appeared upon the face of it fair and plausible; but, without any greater distrust of his majesty's ministers than could be expected from one who for so long a period had differed with them as to the policy the most fitting to be pursued for the interests and honour of the country; he could not help thinking that there was considerable inconvenience in the course proposed, as, instead of having the means of discussing the merits of the negociations to which the documents to be laid before the House referred, the statement of the noble earl would go forth to the public, and make an impression, whilst there would be no opportunity for other noble lords to make themselves acquainted with the contents of the papers. He could not but think that if that had been done at Verona which ought to have been done, and if that tone of language had been assumed which this country ought to have held, we should not at this moment have been in the melancholy and alarming situation that we were. What he apprehended from the mode of proceeding proposed by the noble earl was, that he (earl Grey), and other noble lords who thought as he
707
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that, on the first part of the noble earl's observations, he would say only a few words. Of the propriety of the proceedings at Verona the House would be best able to judge when the papers were before them. All he would now request was, that the noble lord, the House, and the public, would not prejudge his majesty's government, before they saw what had been done by the noble person by whom the negociations at Verona had been conducted. As to the course of proceeding, he could not conceive that any improper
708
Earl Grey
, with reference to what had been said by the noble earl respecting our treaties regarding France, did not mean to insinuate that the noble earl had used the word contravene in any other than the obvious sense; but still, though them: might be no secret articles to contravene the articles in the published treaties, there might be secret articles to extend and enlarge the sense of the published articles. He wished, therefore, to ask the noble earl distinctly, whether there were any such articles in existence?
The Earl of Liverpool
had no hesitation in saying, that, with regard to any support to be given to the throne of France, or the dynasty of the throne of France,
709
Adjourned to the 10th of April.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, March 26, 1823.
PETITION FROM MARY ANN CARLILE
Mr. Hume
, in presenting a petition from Mary Ann Carlile, complaining of hardship, and praying for redress, felt it necessary to state, that he was aware there was a great prejudice against the name of Carlile; but he hoped the House would, in the present case, divest itself of all prejudice against her, on account of her brother. He conceived that a very important principle was involved in the case of Mary Ann Carlile. The prosecution against her was instituted, not by the attorney or solicitor-general, who he (Mr.Hume) conceived were the only legal preservers of the peace and good morals of the community; but by societies which he had long viewed with great jealousy, namely, the Society for the Suppression of Vice, and the Constitutional Association. These societies were little better than conspiracies against the liberty of the subject; and the individuals prosecuted by them might be justly considered as their victims. By a joint purse they were enabled to bear down individuals even in point of expense; and thus render it quite useless to make resistance. The operation which their influence was calculated to produce on the minds of a jury was no small matter. Such had been the case in trials; but he was desirous of confining himself strictly to the present case. He had had the petition in his possession exactly one month. He had been unwilling to present it, until he could ascertain who had been the petitioner's prosecutors. She was tried on the same day at the suit of the Constitutional Association for a seditious libel, and acquitted, and at the suit of the Society for the Suppression of Vice, and found guilty. He had been anxious to discover who the prosecutors in the latter case were; but he had been ten or fourteen days in finding out the members of the Society for Vice, [a laugh]. Well! he could prove, that the Society was one, not for suppression, but for the promotion of vice. On inquiry, he understood that there had not been a list of the members published
710
711
712
713
ipse dixit
ipse dixit
ipse dixit
l.
714
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
715
The petition was brought up and read as follows:—
"To the honourable the Commons of Great Britain and Ireland, in parliament assembled. The petition of Mary Ann Carlile, a prisoner in his majesty's gaol of Dorchester, respectfully sheweth:
"That your petitioner was shop woman to her brother, a bookseller, in Fleet street, in the city of London, and received wages of him for acting in that capacity.
"That your petitioner was prosecuted for selling a pamphlet, the title of which was, 'An Appendix to the Theological Works of Thomas Paine.'
"That this pamphlet, which questioned the divine origin of the Christian religion; was nevertheless mild in its tone and temperate in its manner, in comparison with other works, for publishing of which persons had been prosecuted to conviction.
"That in none of the cases in which persons had been convicted for the publication of the works alluded to, has f, sentence ever been passed on any one, which, in point of severity, admits of any comparison with that which has been and still is, inflicted upon your petitioner.
"That your petitioner appeared in the court of King's-bench, at Guildhall, in the city of London, on the 24th of July, 1821 and there attempted to defend herself against a charge of having published blasphemous libel; but before she had read more than ten or twelve out of mort than a hundred pages of her defence, shi was interrupted by the judge, Mr. Justice Best, who refused to hear the remainder, although the defence was altogether strict]y relevant to the charge made against her.
"That in consequence of the Judge having refused to hear her in her own defence, she was convicted unheard, convicted simply on the case which had been mad against her.
"That your petitioner is convinced is convinced that hers is a case of unparalleled hardship,
716
"That the great injustice done to your petitioner at her trial was still further increased, when, on the ground of her being convicted without having been heard in her defence, she moved for a new trial, that request was peremptorily rejected.
"That on the 15th of November, 1821, your petitioner was sentenced to a year's imprisonment in Dorchester gaol, and also to pay a fine of five hundred pounds, and to remain in prison until the fine of five hundred pounds was paid.
"That your petitioner's year's imprisonment expired on the 15th of November now last past, but she is still detained for the fine of five hundred pounds.
"That your petitioner is twenty-nine years of age, of irreproachable character, and had for the last twelve years, previous to her confinement in Dorchester gaol, maintained herself by her industry, she having no property whatever, nor any other reputable means of obtaining al, livelihood.
"That your petitioner is utterly unable to pay the fine of 500
l.
"That in consequence of this inability, which is no fault in your petitioner, she is sentenced to perpetual imprisonment, in a distant gaol.
"That your petitioner has heard and believes, that in the mouth of December last, the present lord chief justice of the court of King's-bench declared from the bench, that that court in imposing fines upon persons convicted in that court, always paid attention to the ability, or supposed ability, of the person fined to pay the fine, and never intended to impose a fine beyond the ability of the person fined to pay.
"Your petitioner cannot but concluder that hers is, in all respects, a very extraordinary case, and one of singular hardship, and she therefore prays, that your honourable House will interfere in her behalf, so that she may be relesed from her present imprisonment, and that all further proceedings against her for the same alleged offence may be stayed.
"MARY ANN CARLILE.
"Dorchester Gaol, February 5, 1823." On the motion that it do lie on the table,
Sir T. D. Acland
said, there was no occasion on which it was more painful for him to speak, than in endeavouring to
717
718
719
The Attorney-General
said, it was not his intention to enter into any defence of the societies of which the hon. gentleman complained in presenting the petition; but he should be deceived if, after the observations made, and the extracts read by the hon. member for Devonshire, indeed it was impossible, he thought, that there could be a single person in that House who could concur in the charges against the prosecution of those persons. The hon. gentleman who presented the peti-
720
721
l.
l.
722
Mr. Ricardo
trusted that the House would excuse him if he ventured to say a few words upon this petition. The hon. and learned gentleman who had just sat down, appeared to conceive, that Mary Ann Carlile would have been entitled to some lenity, had she expressed contrition for her past offences, or had she stated any change to have taken place in her religious sentiments. Now, they were bound in common justice, to consider that the petitioner was expressing her own sentiments in the libel of which she had been found guilty. The demand, therefore, of time attorney-general was, that she must acknowledge that to be right, which she conscientiously believed to be wrong, before she could entitle herself to any lenity; or, in other words, that she must commit an act of the, most shameless duplicity, in order to become a proper object for the mercy of the crown. While upon that subject, he must be permitted to find fault with a rule that prevailed in the courts of justice. A witness, before he was examined was asked whether he believed in a future state: if he replied that he did not, his oath could not he taken. Supposing that an individual did not believe in a future state,
723
vice versâ.
724
s.
Mr. Secretary Peel
did not rise to reply to all the arguments which had been brought forward on the opposite side, but rather to state the grounds on which he could not recommend the individual in question to the mercy of the crown. The law of the country made it a crime to make any attempt to deprive the lower classes of their belief in the consolations of religion; and while this law remained
725
l.
Sir F. Burdett
complimented the hon. member who had brought forward the
726
727
l.
728
corpus delicti
l.
729
ex officio;
Mr. Peel
said, he had never stated, as the hon. baronet seemed to think, that contrition was a
sina quâ non
Sir F. Burdett
explained. He did not suppose that contrition was a
sine quâ non.
Mr. Wilberforce
defended the Society for the Suppression of Vice. The hon. member for Portarlington seemed to carry into more weighty matters those principles of free trade which he had sp successfully expounded. Ours was the only free country which had ever existed in which there was no special tribunal for the protection of religion and morals. In all the republics of antiquity, in Athens, Sparta, in Rome, there were such tribunals, and in these states morals and religion were considered as the foundations, not only
730
731
732
Ordered to be on the table.
Mr. Hume
said, that as no objection had been made to the receiving of this petition, he took it for granted that the printing of it would not be opposed. He could not make this motion, however, without expressing his astonishment at the conduct of the hon. gentleman who had just sat down, who, after professing himself the enemy of all persecution, had concluded by entreating the House to encourage and continue a system of persecution. As to the Society of which the hon. gentleman stood forward as the champion, it had increased the mischief which it pretended to remove. No fewer than thirty-two victims had been dragged by this Society before courts of law, every one of whom it was their boast that they had convicted; and what was the result? Why, as fast as the prisons were filled with victims, individuals pressed forward eager to become martyrs, and oppose a system of persecution by a participation in the sufferings inflicted by their oppressors. He entreated the right hon. secretary for the home department to consider the policy of supporting these pretended friends, but real enemies of the cause of public morality; for, by upholding such a system, he would consult neither the morals nor the feelings of the country. The hon. member for Bramber had made an appeal rather to the passions than to the judgment of the House, and he (Mr. Hume) entreated him, if he had all the regard he professed for the religion of the country, and for the peace and happiness of families, to pause before he again assisted in propagating what he himself designated as poison, by advocating a system of persecution. Let him attend rather to the excellent advice of a divine, whose writings were no doubt familiar to him, but whose sound and judicious doctrine with reference to this subject, differed widely from those which he (Mr. Wilberforce) had advanced to-night. "The proper punishment," said Dr. Lardner, "for a low, mean, indecent, scurrilous way of writing, seems to be neglect, contempt, scorn and general indignation. This punishment
733
734
Mr. Wynn
denied the doctrine, that no publication of mere matters of opinion could be libellous. The defence set up by the hon. member who had just sat down for these blasphemous publications might be equally applied to the obscene publications, which he himself wished to put down. He would put the case of a person who believed in no religion, and who held that the promiscuous intercourse of the sexes was neither dangerous nor indecorous; and he would further suppose him to publish a book in conformity with these opinions, and in which he should endeavour, by argument and exhortation, to promote their propagation. Could it be pretended that such a publication would not be libellous? The same impunity which the hon. gentleman would extend to blasphemous publications, would, in his view of the argument, apply also to political libels. Acts of regicide might be defended, and it might be contended with impunity, that the kingly power was opposed to the liberties of mankind, and that every individual who killed a king did mankind a service, by ridding them of a tyrant, and was con-
735
Mr. Hume.
— At perfect liberty.
Mr. Wynn.
— If the hon. member was of this opinion, other men might not deem themselves equally invulnerable.—What would be the effect of this doctrine, as applied to women? Was there any female, whose reputation could stand against a series of attacks, if allowed to pass unpunished, or if obliged constantly to come forward and vindicate her character in the newspapers, by proving the falsehood and malignity of her calumniators? An hon. member sitting near the member for Aberdeen (Mr. Bennet) had come forward very properly to vindicate the character of a female against one of those unmanly attacks, by prosecuting the calumniator. He thought it too much to contend, that the public were not entitled to the same protection, which was admitted on all hands to be necessary to the peace and security of private families.
Ordered to be printed.
SCOTCH BURGHS—INVERNESS.]—
Lord A. Hamilton
said, it was with extreme regret that he rose to make a motion on a subject of so much importance, at a time when the House was so thinly attended. The interests of 500,000 persons and of sixty royal burghs were involved in the subject on which he was about to speak; but, however unpleasant it might be to him to execute such a duty, in so thin a House, he should proceed to the task. He had so often complained to the House of the grievances sustained by the Scotch burghs, that no one could be surprised if,
736
l.
737
738
l.
l.
739
l.
740
l.
l.
omnium bonorum
741
s.
l.
l.
l.
The Lord Advocate
said, that in rising to object to the motion, he felt no wish to resist the production of any document from which useful information could be elicited. The warrant complained of had not been issued by the crown on the advice of ministers, but on the advice of the privy council of Great Britain; and it authorized the magistrates to make that election which they had previously a right to make by law. He hoped to convince the House, that in issuing the warrant, a wise and a sound discretion had been exercised. With respect to the petition presented from two brothers of the name of Young, complaining of oppressive conduct on the part of the magistrates, he could now state, that nothing had been done by the magistrates with respect to those individuals, which the noble lord himself would not have done under similar circumstances. The learned lord then went through the case of the petitioners; and read a legal opinion, in which the advocate laid it down as the law of Scotland,
742
omnium bonorum
l.
743
Mr. Cumming
bore testimony to the local improvements which had taken place in Inverness.
Mr. Hume
stated, that this great mistake ran through the whole of the argument of the learned lord, that he mixed up self-election, on which there was no discussion, with the issue of the warrant, founded on a discretionary power. He contended, that what the learned lord stated to be the uniform practice, rested only on the exception to the general rule—which was, for the crown to issue a warrant to the inhabitants to elect the magistrates. He commented upon the conduct of the magistrates of Aberdeen, who, however respectable in their private character, deserved no credit for their public conduct. They had laid out the public money extravagantly, and without reference to utility; for instance, they had thrown an arch of granite 120 feet wide over a puddle that he could with ease leap over. As to the improvements of the harbour, though he admitted that the trade had increased, it was in spite of the supposed improvements, and not in consequence of them. The rates had been doubled. From time increased expense, one of the most valuable articles of export, stone, was now sent by land-carriage; and as to the finances, with those the magistrates had nothing to do, as they were under the management of trustees, by whom, he was happy to say, they were much better managed than they had formerly been.
Mr. Gordon
defended the magistrates of Aberdeen, and affirmed, that, whatever money had been expended by them, was laid out for the benefit of the town.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, the weakness of the case of the noble lord was apparent from this single circumstance—that nearly one-half of the debate had been occupied in an attempt to criminate persons who had nothing to do with the matter. The whole of the charge against the magistrates of Inverness resolved itself into this: that not being able to find any maltman in Inverness, they had elected others. The noble lord had admitted the legality, but doubted the soundness of the discretion exercised by the crown; but, after what he had stated of the extent of the crime imputed to the magistrates, he would submit, that no case had been made out by the noble lord,
744
Mr. Forbes
said, that the statements of the noble lord on this subject had been so often made, and so often refuted, that he wondered how the House could any longer listen to them with patience. He wished the noble lord would chuse some other hobby, and ride it less unmercifully than he had done the Scotch burghs.
Sir R. Fergusson
vindicated his noble friend from the charge of having made an attack on the personal character of the Scottish magistracy. The question here was, whether the crown, when a burgh had been disfranchised, had a right to interfere in the election of its magistrates? He thought it clearly had no such right; but that the burgesses, in such a case, had a right to elect their magistrates by poll.
Mr. W. Smith
thought, that, without casting any personal reflections on the magistracy in question, it must be admitted, that when gentlemen came into office, there was a certain
esprit de corps
Lord A. Hamilton
, in reply, begged to repeat, that a grosser case than that of Aberdeen was never heard of. The corporation was bankrupt to the amount of 130,000
l.
l.
The House divided: Ayes, 31; Noes, 49.
List of the Minority.
Benett, J.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Hume, J.
Bentinck, lord W. H.
James, W.
Bernal, R.
Jervoise, G. P.
Birch, J.
Lennard, T. B.
Blake, sir F.
Lushington, S.
Burdett, sir F.
Macdonald, J.
Creevey, T.
Palmer, C. F.
Davies, T. H.
Philips, G.
Ellice, E.
Philips, G. H.
Fergusson, sir R.
Poyntz, W.
Glenorchy, visc.
Rice, T. S.
Grattan, J.
Rumbold, C. E.
745
Taylor, M. A.
Wyvill, M.
Titchfield, marquis
TELLERS.
White, col.
Hamilton, lord A.
Wood, Matthew
Smith, W.
MONUMENTS TO EARL ST. VINCENT
The House haying resolved itself into a committee of the whole House,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that if, during the closing years of the late war, there were but few occasions, or at least, fewer than had once been the case, in which parliament was called upon to address the crown, on subjects similar to that to which it was now his duty to call the attention of the House, that circumstance arose, not from any want of valour, or enterprise, or credit, or renown, on the part of those who conducted the naval service of this kingdom; but it arose from the singular circumstance, that, in the earlier part of the late war, the exploits of our navy had annihilated, as he might say, those powerful means of resistance which the enemy possessed; and which exploits then gave frequent occasion for addresses similar to that which he was about to propose. It would not be necessary for him to trouble the House at any length on the present subject; but he would say, that, if the recent rarity of these occasions had deprived the House of the opportunity of testifying the gratitude which it owed to those who had devoted their lives to the service of their country, he thought that that was an additional reason why, after so long enjoying all the advantages of that security, which the efforts of our navy had conferred on us; if, in the time of peace, there should occur such an event as the death of a brave admiral, covered with years and glory, it should be the duty of the House to take care that his remains should not sink into an obscure grave. He thought it would be consistent with their feelings, as it would be with their duty, not to forget, merely from the length of time that might have elapsed since the period when great naval services had been rendered by distinguished men, the true value of those services; but rather to hold out to succeeding ages the benefit of their great example. He was sure it was not necessary for him to trouble the House with any details of the lives and general services of the two great officers, to whose merits he was about to call its attention. To say of both that they had entered the service of
746
747
748
749
Agreed to,
nem. con.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 27, 1823.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' BILL.]—
The Lord Mayor
presented a petition from 1,600 merchants, bankers, and traders of the city of London, praying for some alterations in the Insolvent Debtors' act. He said, he presented this petition with pleasure, not merely as chief magistrate, and chairman of the meeting at the Mansion-house, but also as a member of parliament, being perfectly convinced that this act, originating in benevolent and pure motives, had given rise to more fraud and robbery than it was possible for him to describe. This feeling was, he said, now universal, and all parts of the country were as desirous as the metropolis to procure some change in its provisions. It was unnecessary for him to go at length into a subject so much discussed, but he would beg to suggest these alterations in particular; that the first step in taking the benefit of this act should be an act of bankruptcy, thus leaving the creditor the option of availing himself of that mode of proceeding; that the consent of a part, at least, of the creditors should be necessary to the discharge of the debtor; and that the detaining creditor should no longer be at liberty, at his own pleasure, to relieve the insolvent. As this act was only a measure of experiment, which had been found to fail, he sincerely hoped that it would be speedily and effectually amended.
Mr. Alderman Thompson
testified to the great respectability of the petitioners, and declared his cordial concurrence in the prayer of the petition.
Mr. Alderman Wood
expressed similar opinions. All that the petitioners required was, not severity, but justice.
Mr. T. Wilson
also supported the prayer of the petition.
Ordered to lie on the table.
COAL DUTIES.]—
Sir James Graham
presented a petition, which he observed was most respectably signed, being subscribed by many of the principal inhabi-
750
Mr. Curwen
said, he had great pleasure in supporting the prayer of the petition. Nothing could show the mischievous tendency of these duties more than the fact, that one-third at least of all the coal dug from the mines in Durham and Cumberland was wasted and lost, because it was of a quality that would not bear the duties in question, although it would perfectly answer the purposes of the poorer sort, if the tax was removed.
Colonel Bagwell
complained, that besides the government duties, the duty payable on coals in the ports of Ireland rendered it an extremely dear commodity to the people of that country.
Lord W. Fitzgerald,
sir John Newport, alderman C. Smith, Mr. Frankland Lewis, and Mr. Thomas Wilson, severally supported the prayer of the petition, and expatiated on the severity of this tax.
Mr. Littleton
defended the continuance of these duties for a longer period, on the ground, that many capitals having been invested by individuals in coal-property, in different parts of the country, under such a system of duties, too sudden a repeal of the tax would be the occasion of very materially injuring those who were at present very extensively interested in coal-property.
The petition was read, and ordered to be printed.
Sir J. Graham
next presented a similar petition from the vestry and directors of the poor of the parish of St. Pancras. The hon. baronet observed, that he could imagine no duties of a more impolitic nature than these upon coals; seeing that they had a direct tendency to discourage a trade which was the best nursery of lour gallant seamen.
Ordered to lie on the table.
POOR LAWS AMENDMENT BILL.]—
Mr. T. P. Courtenay
moved for leave to bring in a bill "to amend the Laws regarding the maintenance and employment of the Poor." Leave was given, and the bill was brought in, and read a first time; and ordered to be read a second time on the 28th of April.
751
EAST INDIA TRADE.]—
Mr. T. P. Courtenay
moved for an account, 1. "Of the number of ships, with the amount of their tonnage, which have entered inwards, and cleared outwards, at the several ports of Great Britain, from and to the East Indies, for three years, ending the 5th January, 1823:—2. Of all goods exported from Great Britain to the East Indies and China, for three years, ending the 5th January, 1823, distinguishing each year; specifying the value of the principal articles, and also distinguishing India from China, so far as the same can be ascertained:—3. Of the value of all articles, being of the growth or manufacture of the United Kingdom, exported by the East India Company, from the year 1820–21, inclusive, to the latest period to which the same can be made up; distinguishing such as were exported as merchandize for sale, from those that were exported as stores; and distinguishing each year:—4. Of all goods, the produce of the East Indies and China, imported into, and exported from, Great Britain, for three years, ending the 5th January, 1823, distinguishing each year; specifying the quantities of the principal articles, and the aggregate value thereof; and also distinguishing the produce of India from China, so far as the same can be ascertained:—5. Of the amount of duties (of customs) received upon goods imported from the East Indies, for three years, ending the 5th January, 1823; distinguishing each year, and the principal articles:—6. Of all goods, of the produce of the East Indies and China, imported into Great Britain during each of the last three years; specifying the quantity and value of the principal articles imported, and stating the imports by the East India Company, distinct and separate from the free trade:—7. Of all goods exported from Great Britain to the East Indies and China, during each of the last three years; specifying the quantity and declared value of the principal articles exported, and stating the exports by the East India Company, distinct and separate from the free trade."—Ordered.
COMBINATION OF WORKMEN BILL—PETITION FROM NOTTINGHAM.]—
A Petition from the town and county of the town of Nottingham, was presented, and read, setting forth, "That the petitioners have been informed that there is now a bill before the House, to repeal all the
752
753
754
PETITION FROM TOBAGO COMPLAINING OF DISTRESS.]—
A Petition of the Legislative Council and General Assembly of the Island of Tobago, and its dependencies, was presented, and read; setting forth,
"That the island of Tobago (in common with the other British possessions in the West Indies) is now in a situation of such extreme distress as, if not promptly and efficaciously removed, must terminate in absolute rum of its agricultural and mercantile interests; and, deeply impressed with a sense of the danger which impends over that colony, the petitioners venture to approach the House, to state their present situation and their future prospects, trusting that the same fostering protection which reared the colony in its infancy will not be wanting in its support, when assailed by distresses that threaten its very existence; were these distresses, however, peculiar to the colony of Tobago, any claim they might prefer in that case to the House, must have wanted the magnitude of interesest, associated with their present appeal, which affects matters so momentous, and infers consequences of so alarming a nature as to be well worthy the most serious consideration of the British legislature; the pressure which they feel, and the distresses which they complain of, are experienced by them, in common with the whole of the West India colonies, the situation of which is, at this moment, unparalleled since the commencement of their annals; the causes of this overwhelming and universal distress must be sought either in the relative situation of the British West India colonies to those of other nations in the
755
756
757
Ordered to lie on the table.
ORANGE ASSOCIATIONS.]—
The reader is requested to substitute the following correct report of Mr. Dawson's Speech on this subject, in the room of the brief outline which will be found at p. 529. It took place on the 10th of May, upon the bringing up of the report of the Committee on the Army Estimates. On the resolution, "That the sum of 19,384
l.
s.
d.
Mr. Dawson
said, he thought the House had some right to complain of the manner in which all questions relating to
758
"Turk, Infidel, or Atheist
May enter here—but not a Papist."
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
WESTMINSTER ABBEY.]—
Mr. Hume,
on the bringing up of the resolutions for
766
s.
ABOLITION OF SLAVERY.]—
Sir Robert Wilson
said, that the petition which he held in his hand, and which he was proud and happy to have the honour of presenting to the House, came from a certain number of the electors whom he had the happiness of representing. He was instructed to say, that this petition would have been submitted for signatures for a longer period, and would in that case, no doubt, have received the unanimous approbation of all the electors of Southwark, had there been time to allow of calling a meeting of those individuals before the Easter recess. It was, however, considered by the petitioners, and in his opinion very advisedly, that to wait for the convening of such a meeting would be inexpedient. They had therefore determined to present their petition before the recess; that the feeling of the country might be fully known upon it, and that public attention might be awakened to the proposition to which the hon. member for Bramber had recently called the attention of the House and the country; namely the abolition of slavery through-
767
768
l.
l.
769
Mr. Bright
said, he felt himself impelled, by a strong sense of duty, to notice the gross exaggerations which the petition contained; such, for instance, as that there was not a negro on whom the marks of the lash were not visible. He was perfectly confident, that if the allegations of the petition were strictly examined, they would be found to contain a much larger portion of falsehood than of truth. As to the character of the individual to whose authority the petitioners referred, he knew nothing respecting it. But it appeared that that person had been sent out as a missionary to his estate by a benevolent planter, who had proved the humanity of his disposition by reducing the labour which used to be performed by his slaves one-fourth. After having been so sent out, what did that person do? He was three years, and he complained that he had been allowed to preach to the negroes only eleven times a year; but preaching was not the way to ameliorate the condition of the slaves. His duty was to have visited them; to have seen to their wants; to have relieved their necessities. The individual in question, however, had too much spiritual pride to do any thing but preach; and yet it was on the authority of such a man that the petitioners called on the House to believe the allegations of their petition. The hon. member for Southwark had referred to the conduct of the republic of Colombia as an example to be followed by England with regard to the slaves in the West Indies. Now the conduct of the Colombian republic could furnish no precedent for this country. The number of slaves in Colom-
770
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, he did not rise to take any part in the discussion; but rather to induce hon. gentlemen to postpone any further observations until the proper time should arrive. It was a subject so important, that he had no hesitation m saying, that great practical results must, in some way or other, proceed from the consideration of it. But of this he was sure, that such incidental and premature discussions as the present must materially diminish the chance of obtaining a result of a beneficial or effective character. It was unnecessary for him, who, during the whole of his parliamentary life, from its beginning until the triumph of his hon. friend, the member for Bramber, had taken a humble part in the cause of the abolition of the slave trade, to say, that it was not possible he could entertain any feeling which would induce him to oppose himself to a fair consideration of the question of emancipation. But he was sure that his hon. friend himself would agree with him, and that the House would have his hon. friend's example in support of the proposition that it was not by inflaming the passions, that the cause of humanity could be
771
Mr. W. Smith
said, he was very much inclined to follow the advice of the right hon. gentleman, though the personal attack of an hon. member, in a sort of parable, was very little calculated to put an end to discussion. Though he did not personally know the individual alluded to, he could, from what he had heard of him, give a direct contradiction to the imputation of the hon. member.
Mr. Bright
explained, that he was not personally acquainted with the individual referred to.
Sir R. Wilson
said, that two years ago, he had given notice of a motion on the emancipation of slaves in the Cape of Good Hope, which he had given up on a promise from his majesty's government; but, as nothing had since been done, he had thought fit to call the attention of his majesty's ministers to the subject.
Ordered to lie on the table.
FOREIGN RELATIONS—FRANCE AND SPAIN.]—
On the motion, "That the House will at its rising adjourn to Thursday the 10th of April,"
Lord A. Hamilton
rose to object to the motion. He considered the period of adjournment proposed by the right hon. gentleman too long, and he would attempt to curtail it, by moving, as an amendment, that the House should adjourn only to Monday se'nnight. He
772
773
774
per se
775
776
Mr. Macdonald,
in conjunction with his noble friend, declared, that he could by no means acquiesce in the propriety of so long an adjournment as the right hon. secretary had proposed, at the precise moment when a struggle of unexampled interest had commenced, which was lo decide whether the term "independence of nations" was any longer to be found in the vocabulary of mankind. For he thought he might say, that this struggle had commenced, seeing that a delicate prince had sallied forth, amid hail and snow, accompanied by a large retinue of led horses and soft carriages, to put himself at the head of 60,000 men,
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
ipso facto
785
bonâfide,
786
Mr. Warre,
after pointing out a seeming contradiction between the treaty of Vienna and that of Aix-la-Chapelle, begged to ask the right hon. gentleman, whether the treaties into which this country had entered did, in effect, guarantee to the Bourbon family possession of the throne of France? He expressed his perfect conviction, that, among the papers soon to be laid upon the table, it would be found that the duke of Wellington had recalled to the recollection of the sovereigns at Verona, the protocol of the 5th of November, 1815, signed by the names of Metternich, Richelieu, Castlereagh, Wellington, Hardenberg, Bernsdorf, Nesselrode, and Capo d'lstria. It concluded by stating, that "in the case of this meeting having for their object affairs specially connected with the interests of the other states of Europe, they shall only take place in pursuance of a formal invitation, on the part of such of those states as the said affairs may concern." He begged to know whether Spain had been represented at the congress at Verona, and whether the invitation spoken of had been given to her? If not, the allies had been guilty of a violation of their own treaty. Whoever wished to come to the discussion of this subject three weeks hence, properly prepared, must refresh his memory by looking into the documents laid upon the table by the late marquis of Londonderry. He hoped to find in the papers to be submitted to the House a strong protest on the part of our ministers against all meddling at the congress with the affairs of Spain. He did not wish to prejudge them; but, from the weighty matters the House had to discuss, he was in favour of the shorter adjournment.
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, he did not rise to enter into the various topics introduced upon the question of adjournment; indeed he doubted whether he should have risen at all, but for the question put to him by the hon. gentleman who spoke last, with reference to a conversation of a few nights ago upon the existing treaties to which this country was a party. The
787
788
789
The amendment was negatived, and the House adjourned to the 10th of April.
790
PAPERS RELATIVE TO THE STATE OF IRELAND.]—
The following Papers relative to the State of Ireland, were resented to the House:—
No. I.—Letter from the Lord-Lieutenant to Mr. Secretary Peel, containing Extracts from a Letter from the Attorney-general to the Lord-Lieutenant.
Dublin Castle, Nov. 26, 1822.
Sir;—I have the honour to in close, for the information of his majesty's government, the copy of a letter from the attorney-general, together with an authentic report of the evidence taken on the late trials in Dublin, of several persons, for the crimes of administering and of taking unlawful oaths.
I request your particular attention to that part of the letter of the attorney-general, which recommends the extension of the provisions of the act of the 39th Geo. 3rd to Ireland; and I beg leave to express my entire concurrence in that recommendation, and to add my humble request, that the early attention of parliament may be called to this measure, as being intimately connected with the means of checking the progress of the system of illegal associations in Ireland. I have the honour to be, &c. &c. WELLESLEY.
P. S.—These communications would have been forwarded sooner, but that considerable time was required for printing authentic copies of the evidence given on the trials.
Nov. 9, 1822.
My Lord;—Your excellency will learn, from the report of Mr. Greene, who has taken a correct note of the evidence, the particulars of the late trials.—I cannot, however, postpone my congratulations on the result, which I consider as likely, not merely to give an immediate check to the spreading of the conspiracy, but as affording the reasonable expectation of its final suppression at no very distant period.
I fear that, in five or six counties, great numbers, indeed, of the lower classes have been involved in it; some of them from a love of enterprise and ready disposition for mischief; some on a principle of counteraction to exclusive associations of an opposite description; but most of them, I should hope, from terror on the one hand, and the expectation of impunity on the other. This expectation must now be effectually removed; and the terror of the law will, I trust, soon be substituted
791
A prosecution for high treason would have rested on an insecure foundation in law; its success would have been extremely doubtful, with reference to the probable effect of the evidence; and to have been defeated in the attempt to establish such a charge, would have been injurious in a high degree. A charge for a traitorous conspiracy, would not have been liable to the same objections in law, but its success would, in my opinion, have been very doubtful; and even if convictions had been obtained, many persons would have doubted their justice, and the punishment would have been nothing beyond that of a misdemeanor; whereas we now have seven convictions, drawing after them the sentences of transportation for life; and one, that of transportation for seven years; and besides, every person must be entirely convinced, that the crime alleged was really committed, and that the evidence was, in this respect, perfectly true. Universal distrust is now spread amongst these people; and, by watching the occurrences at these meetings, and, perhaps, by a few additional convictions in some of the counties into which the mischief had extended itself, I trust we may, without being too sanguine, look for a gradual return to quiet, and, perhaps, to better dispositions. At the same time, I cannot but wish, that the provisions of the 39th of the late king were extended to this country; under them we could transport for seven years, all who should be proved to be members of the association, without the necessity of establishing the fact of administering or taking the oath; with such an instrument to work with, I should entertain a confident expectation of entirely subduing this offensive and disgusting conspiracy.
Your excellency will observe with regret, that the association has been founded on a principle of religious exclusion. It is, however, a matter of great satisfaction to know, that no person of any rank or consequence, or indeed of any respectable station in society, has joined in or countenanced it. The juries were sworn without any reference to religious persuasion; a rule which I have uniformly observed,
792
(Signed)
W. C. PLUNKETT.
No. II.—Letter from the Lord-lieutenant to Mr. Secretary Peel.
Phœenix Park, January 29th, 1823.
Sir;—A considerable time has elapsed since I have addressed to you a detailed report of outrages committed in the provinces of Ireland, according to the plan which I pursued during the last winter and spring, of submitting periodical statements on that subject, for his majesty's information.
During the summer and the early part of the autumn of 1822, the measures sanctioned by parliament, for the restoration of tranquillity, combined with other causes, had produced such a degree of quiet, that no necessity existed for my usual communications; and I entertained a hope, that I might have been able at this time to furnish a very favourable report of the actual state of the country; and that this winter would have passed without any material disturbance of the public tranquillity.
Although events have happened in some of the provinces, which have disappointed my expectations, I am happy to inform you, that the general condition of Ireland, with respect to internal tranquillity, is considerably ameliorated.
In the county of Limerick, the principal seat of the late disturbances, my expectations have not been disappointed. The reports from the magistrates of that county, present no aggravated cases of crime, but manifest indications of the decline of that system of illegal and secret combination, which originally led to open violence. Information is now more readily afforded; criminals are more easily detected; and the witnesses against them no longer entertain that extreme apprehension of danger, which, during the early part of the year 1822, so universally, and so justly prevailed.
Limerick, therefore, has been restored to a state of tranquillity, and it is now more exempt from crimes than other counties, which have been deemed tranquil. The condition of Limerick, however, cannot justify the removal of any considerable portion of the force of the army or police; nor the suspension of the operation of the Insurrection act.
In the general conflict of political opinion, which is the prevalent character of
793
But, whatever may be the original cause of tranquillity, I do not apprehend that the county of Limerick will soon be disturbed again, to any great degree. Under the protection of the law, lately enacted, an improved force of police has been established in the county; and the magistrates have incessantly laboured to improve the local administration of justice, and to give additional power to the laws, by a more vigorous and impartial exercise of their provisions.
If the protection now afforded be continued for a sufficient period of time to render the success of the plans of the original agitators hopeless and impracticable, the ordinary laws, under a just and pure administration, may be found amply sufficient for the preservation of the public peace in that county.
It is impossible not to contemplate the improved condition of the county of Limerick with a degree of satisfaction, not confined to the limits of that district, but opening to a prospect of similar and more extensive benefits, through the introduction of similar improvements in other parts of Ireland. Nor can I withhold the testimony of my most cordial approbation of the merits of the nobility, gentry, clergy, and magistrates of Limerick, in enabling the government to lay the foundations of this great and auspicious work—by which the main source of disorder and lawless violence has been rendered an example of tranquillity, and of the due administration of justice. In the advance which has been made towards this salutary reform, the services of Mr. Serjeant Torrens have been most essentially and eminently useful; nor is it possible for me to express, in terms of too warm commendation, my grateful sense of his judicious, humane, and active and persevering exertions.
The county of Clare has generally been exempt, until lately, from outrages of a serious or insurrectionary character.
At the end of November last, however, some disposition to disturbance began to manifest itself in Clare—by notices on the subject of tithes—by punishing persons engaged in the collection of them—and by a violent attack on Mr. M'Cullock,
794
To such an extent had crime prevailed in the barony of Tulla, that the magistrates had anticipated the necessity of requiring the application of the provisions of the insurrection act.
Serious outrage, however, has been principally confined to the proclaimed districts of the counties of Cork and Tipperary.
At the close of the harvest, a general disposition was manifested, in those districts, to invade the property of the clergy, and of others receiving an income from tithe.
The system of notices (not applied, as formerly, to rents and tithes,) was confined to tithes; and these notices were followed by acts of outrage, differing from those in the last year, both in character and conduct.
Tithe property, whether in the hands of laymen or ecclesiastics, was the object of attack; and the means usually employed, destruction by fire. During the latter part of September, few nights passed without the destruction, by fire, of some building, haggard or stacks of tithe-corn, in the proclaimed baronies of the county of Cork. The same system has continued in those baronies, with some abatement, to the present time.
It is a curious circumstance, however, in the character of these transactions, that, in several instances, the grain had been artfully separated from the straw, and had been sold by the proprietor of the stacks, for its full value; and that the same proprietor had destroyed the stacks of straw by fire, with a view of recovering from the barony the full value of the corn already sold. These cases were not unfrequent.
The incendiary was of course undiscoverable.—The fact of such numerous and secret conflagrations was alleged to be an indisputable proof of general combination, until the vigilance of the military and police actually detected a considerable number of the stacks of straw, cleared of the grain, and prepared for the fire, and thus discovered the whole mystery of this double fraud.
By the activity of the troops and of the police, the number of conflagrations has been gradually reduced; several instances, however, of that outrage occurred during the last week, in one barony.
795
While these lawless outrages have been directed against tithe property, the former system of robbing houses for arms, has not been altogether abandoned.—Atteratits to destroy persons obnoxious to the insurgents, on account of information given, or of a refusal to obey their commands, have been renewed; but these robberies have not been frequent, and have appeared rather subsidiary to the attainment of other objects, connected with the destruction of the property of the church.
In the course of November, the system extended itself to the barony adjoining those originally proclaimed, to such an extent, as to require the application of the provisions of the Peace Preservation bill.
Instances also have occurred of similar outrages against tithe property, in parts of the county of Cork, more remote from the baronies in which the spirit of violence originally appeared. There is reason to believe, that in some of these cases, the outrages have been perpetrated by persons detached for the special purposes, from the disturbed baronies; and even in the parts of the country where the outrages have most prevailed, they have seldom been conducted by persons of the immediate neighbourhood, with the exception of the cases of fraud already described.
In Tipperary a similar system commenced, though in a mitigated degree. During the latter part of September and the month of October, some destructions of property by fire occurred; notices were posted, and some attacks were made for the purpose of procuring arms. The progress of disturbance appeared so rapid to some persons, as to induce the magistrates, assembled at a special session, to request an extension of the Insurrection act to a barony to which it had not been previously applied.
The request having been received on the eve of the proclamation for carrying in to effect, in that county, the new system of police, it was thought advisable to withhold the application of the Insurrection act, until the effect of the new system of police had been ascertained by experiment.
Many crimes have since been committed in the county of Tipperary, but not generally, of the former insurrectionary character.
The districts of the King's and Queen's counties, bordering on Tipperary, have
796
In the county of Roscommon, notices, of an inflammatory and threatening character, during the winter, have been generally circulated.
Outrages have at intervals been committed, of an aggravated nature, some partaking of the character of those now prevailing in certain districts of the county of Cork, and others more connected with the general disturbances of the last year; but, in consequence of the exertions of the police, the outrages in Roscommon have not attained any alarming height.
Some disturbance has also occurred in the counties of Kildare and Westmeath; it has been met, in both instances, by an extension of the Peace Preservation act to additional baronies.
The province of Ulster maintains its tranquillity. From many quarters information has been received, of an increased activity in the swearing of Ribbon-men; and, in some instances, meetings have been held, which have terminated in serious affrays; but, with the exception of these riotous proceedings, the peace of the province had been generally preserved by the exertions of the gentry and magistrates. This general view of the state of Ireland certainly exhibits a scene of improved tranquillity, compared with the corresponding period of the last year.
Numerous crimes are recorded in the reports of the several magistrates; but they have not been so frequent, and generally not of so sanguinary a character, and not so strongly marked by a systematic resistance of authority. The fear of the law appears, in many instances, to have superseded the dread of lawless vengeance. Difficulties of procuring evidence of crimes, committed even in the presence of many witnesses, still exist; but those difficulties are neither so great nor so general as in the former periods of time. The execution of some individuals, for the murder of a crown witness, at Limerick, has given confidence, to the well-affected; and has created a general
797
Undoubtedly, throughout the whole country, a general disposition prevails to evade the property of the clergy, to resist the payment of tithes; and to resort to every means of defeating all demands of the church. This may be partly attributed to the difficulties of the times, partly to the spirit of resisting lawful authority, which has been so sedulously encouraged. While this spirit shall continue to break forth in outrages of the nature now prevailing in some districts of Cork, and in other places; while these outrages shall he committed by combinations of persons not immediately connected with the actual scene of mischief, but traversing the country at night, in gangs of incendiaries; prudence must forbid the relaxation of those extraordinary powers which parliament considered to be necessary for the preservation of the peace of Ireland; and which, duly exercised, have already contributed to produce whatever improvement has been effected in the general state of the country.
Among the causes of public amelioration which have commenced to operate in Ireland, the act of the last session of parliament for the improvement of the police, demands particular notice.
The introduction of the improved system of police, has been accomplished gradually, and with general good will and temper in several counties.
The magistrates have cheerfully cooperated in giving effect to this great and salutary alteration in the internal government of Ireland.
It would neither be prudent nor just to precipitate the extension of so considerable a change of system; the beneficial progress of which might be frustrated, but could not be accelerated by a premature effort to force its universal application.
In some districts, the practical benefits of the system, itself, have already commenced their operation. It would, how-
798
In the mean while, it is highly satisfactory to observe, that the early appearance of this plan bears an aspect so favourable and hopeful.
Similar observations occur with respect to the revision of the commission of the peace. No reasonable mind could expect that so invidious a task could be attempted without occasioning partial discontent; or that a work so difficult and complicated, could at once be accomplished and displayed in complete perfection. The experience of all practical government, the rules of all political wisdom, would naturally suggest, that such a revision could not be perfect in its first effort; and must require frequent and careful reconsideration, before its advantages could be entirely realized.
Accordingly, complaints have arisen, with respect to the most delicate and arduous considerations, in the progress of this necessary reform; attention has been paid to these complaints, wherever it has been deemed consistent with the principles of the proposed improvement; and I have no doubt, that the commission of the peace will be the object of constant vigilance and care, until the beneficial views of his majesty's government shall be perfected, to the utmost practical extent, in the general improvement of the magistracy of Ireland.
In some counties, the reform is already almost complete, and is generally satisfactory; while, throughout Ireland, the mere knowledge of the existence of a system of revision has produced salutary consequences, by increasing the diligence, accuracy, and careful conduct of the magistrates—and by a more effectual and more pure administration of the law.
The useful practice of assembling frequently and regularly in, petty session, has been introduced into some countries; and the dangerous habit of administering justice by separate magistrates, at their
799
I have given every encouragement to the extension of the system of holding petty sessions; and, at one moment, I contemplated the propriety of suggesting a law upon the subject. But, having reason to believe that the magistracy is generally disposed to adopt the practice by voluntary regulation, I prefer the experiment of their own uncontrolled goodwill, until I can ascertain, by time, whether the addition of legal rule may be necessary to stimulate their exertions.
From the statement of facts contained in this despatch, and from the observations which I have submitted to you, it will appear, that the general condition of Ireland, with regard to the internal peace and tranquillity of the provinces, is considerably improved since the last winter; that the appearance of systematic disturbance is confined to a few districts on the north-western boundary of the county of Cork; and that, even in those districts, no insurrectionary combination has been manifested; but that a most outrageous attack has been made upon the system of tithes, and upon the rights and property of the church with reference to that system.
That a considerable improvement has been effected in the administration of the law, within the districts which had been disturbed; and that it is reasonable to expect increased vigour and purity in that administration. That the new police had been introduced into the lately disturbed districts, and into others, with general approbation, with the cordial and effective co-operation of the magistrates, and in many instances, with great success in the detection of crime, the speedy apprehension of offenders, and the maintenance of public peace.
That the revision of the magistracy is proceeding regularly; and that the general conduct of the magistrates, in establishing frequent petty sessions, and other useful regulations, affords just reason to expect a progressive improvement in the magistracy of Ireland.
I have not referred in this despatch to the dangerous system of associations under the obligation of secret and mysterious oaths. Having, sometime since, submitted to you a separate despatch, relative to the trial and conviction of several persons denominated Ribbonmen, I added to that despatch some observations, suggesting
800
The question of the increase or diminution of the spirit of this association, is stated differently, according to the particular views, imaginary interests, and flagrant zeal of conflicting parties.
In this contention (ludicrous in principle and theory, but mischievous to the state in practice), it is, at least, an advantage to the king's government to have completely detected and publicly exposed the whole craft and mystery of the Ribbon conspiracy. And I cannot believe that such an exposure, accompanied by such convictions, sentences, and punishments, should neither assuage the zeal, nor abate the bravery of these covenanters, nor relax the holy bond of their illegal oaths, and treasonable contract.
But I request your attention to the suggestions which I have submitted, for the more effectual restraint of this system of mysterious engagements, formed under the solemnity of secret oaths, binding his majesty's liege subjects to act under authorities not known to the law, nor derived from the state, for purposes undefined; not disclosed in the first process of initiation; nor until the infatuated novice has been sworn to the vow of unlimited and lawless obedience.
The vigour and activity of the law should be exerted to extirpate this mischief, which has been a main cause of the disturbances and miseries of Ireland. The mystery is now distinctly exposed: I therefore anxiously hope and trust, that his majesty's government will add to the various benefits which they have already-imparted to this country, the inestimable favour of abolishing by law, in Ireland, an evil, which has been abolished by law in England. I have, &c
WELLESLEY.
P. S. In examining this despatch, I perceive, that although the necessity of continuing the Insurrection act, is repeatedly to be inferred from the tenor of the facts and observations stated, I have not directly recommended that measure; I request his majesty's government to understand, that I consider the renewal of the Insurrection act, for another year, to be indispensably requisite, not only for the preservation of tranquillity in Ireland, I but for the success of all those plans of improvement which may be expected, ultimately, to render the Insurrection act unnecessary.—W.
801
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, April 10, 1823.
NEGOTIATIONS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.]
Colonel Davies,
seeing the right hon. secretary for foreign affairs in his place, wished to ask him, whether, when he should on Monday next lay upon the table of the house certain documents, it was his intention to enter into a general statement of the foreign policy of the government? If he were right in supposing that that was the intention of the right hon. secretary, the members on his side of the House would be placed in this embarrassing situation, that they must either combat the statement of the right hon. secretary, without having had access to the documents upon which it would be founded, or allow it to go forth to the world uncontradicted. He thought the fairest course for ministers to pursue would be, to lay the documents on the table on Monday, and to fix upon some subsequent day for the statement which the right hon. secretary had promised to make.
Mr. Secretary Canning
replied, that the hon. member was perfectly right in supposing that it was his intention, when he should on Monday next, in obedience to the commands of his majesty, lay certain documents on the table of the House, to state the general outline of the policy which the British government had pursued with respect to the late transactions on the continent. But far from thinking that he would by so doing place the house under any embarrassment, he was of opinion that he was adopting the course which would be most convenient. The present case was not one of an ordinary character. It was not a usual practice of government, to lay documents on the table of the House, upon which they did not intend to call for some proceeding; but, in the present instance, it was intended to depart from the customary usage. That, however, would not preclude any member from adopting what course he might think expedient with respect to the papers. In most cases in which documents relative to negotiations had been laid before parliament, the negotiations had terminated in a declaration of war; and, on all such occasions, government had availed itself of the opportunity of stating to parliament, what had been the course of policy which had led to the issuing of the declaration of war. The
802
FIRST FRUITS IN IRELAND.]
Sir John Newport
rose, in pursuance of notice, to bring forward his motion for levying in a more effectual manner, the First Fruits of the Clergy of Ireland. The right hon. baronet observed, that so long ago as 1808, he had brought this subject before the attention of the House, and the importance of it was every day becoming more manifest. It was well known, that the revenue arising from the first fruits of benefices in Ireland, was in the hands of trustees for the purchasing of glebes, and the building of glebe-houses for the clergy of Ireland; but that the revenue arising from this source was so small, that large sums were annually voted to supply its deficiencies. It would be necessary for him to give a short history of the origin of this fund, and of the muse of its present inadequate amount. The Annates, or first fruits, were, the whole first year's income of each ecclesiastical benefice, and, before the Reformation, were payable in Ireland, as in other countries, to the pope. By statutes of Henry 8th, when the papal rights in Ireland were extinguished, this revenue, together with the twentieths or yearly twelve-pence in the pound, payable also to the pope from every benefice, was taken into the hands of the Crown, and remained annexed to the Crown till the year 1710. In that year queen Anne, on the advice of the duke of Ormond, or of the lord treasurer Oxford (for the supposed merit of this measure was claimed for both of them), remitted the twentieths to the clergy, and gave the first fruits to form a fund for the building of churches and
803
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
804
l.
805
1. "That the first fruits or annates, being the first year's income of every ecclesiastical dignity and benefice in Ireland, became at the Reformation, a part of the revenue of the Crown, as head of the church, and was regulated by the Irish statute of the 28th Henry 8th and continued annexed to the royal revenues until the year 1710.
2. "That her majesty queen Anne did then, as an act of grace and favour to the established church of Ireland, by letters patent confirmed by the authority of Parliament, vest in certain trustees and commissioners the produce of this branch of royal revenue, for the purposes of building and repairing Churches, for the purchase of glebes where wanting, and of impropriations wherever the benefice was not sufficient for the liberal maintenance of the clergy having cure of souls; and did at the same time absolutely release them from the payment of the twentieth parts, or twelve-pence in the pound, before paid annually to the Crown out of the income of all ecclesiastical benefices.
3. "That it appears, from returns laid before this House, that the gross amount of the first-fruit revenues thus vested in trust, and paid in to the commissioners, during ten years, ending in January 1821, amounted only to 3,752
l.
l.
l.
l.
4. "That the grants of Parliament for building new Churches and Glebe-houses, and the purchase of Glebes, in Ireland, during eleven years, ending in 1818, amounted to 498,000
l.,
l.,
5. "That 467 of the dignities and be-
806
l.
6. "That the receipt and management of this revenue have been always reserved to, and continued in, officers appointed by the Crown; and that the duties thereof were, by letters patent, in the year 1812, entrusted to commissioners, with power, as therein specified, from time to time, to collect, levy, and receive, and to examine and search for the just and true value of all and singular the dignities and benefices of Ireland; but that no valuation appears to have been made under authority of this patent.
7. "That these resolutions be laid before his majesty, together with the humble representation of the House, that it appears just and equitable that this branch of royal revenue, liberally bestowed on the Church of Ireland for wise and salutary purposes, should be rendered efficacious for the attainment of the objects of royal bounty, without the necessity of annually increasing the public burthens by parliamentry grants; and that this House does therefore humbly pray, that his majesty may be pleased to authorize and direct the patentees of the Crown to proceed forthwith in the execution of such measures as may be deemed necessary to effect a just and true valuation of the several dignities and benefices of Ireland, and for rendering all such as shall be found to exceed the annual value of 150
l.
Mr. Goulburn
said, he should not oppose any measure which could put the Church of Ireland on a better footing; but the question now really before the House was, whether they should levy a tax to the amount of 30 or 40,000
l.
807
l.
s.
l.
808
Sir J. Newport
shortly replied, observing particularly upon the reluctance of the Church, not only to contribute their share to the support of the general burthens, but even to the maintenance of their own poorer clergy.
The previous question being put on the first resolution, the House divided: Ayes 39. Noes 49. Majority against the resolution 9.
CROWN DEBTORS—CONTEMPT OF
Mr. Hume
rose to move for two returns connected with Crown priso-
809
l.
810
l.
The Solicitor General
thought the hon. member was incorrect in his view of the law as it existed. All persons confined for non-payment of money pursuant to an order of court, were already entitled to their discharge under the insolvent act. Persons who remained in prison for contempts of court, were commonly persons who refused to do some act, within their power, which the court had ordered them to do: For instance, a case came before the lord-chancellor.—Upon investigation, it was decided that one of the parties ought to do a particular act; such as the execution of a deed or instrument. Under such circumstances (and the case was a case of every day), the court had no power to compel the execution of the deed or instrument in question: all it could do, was, to imprison for refusal. To deprive the court of the power to imprison was, in effect, to nullify its jurisdiction; and surely the party suffering had no right to complain of a confinement to which he could put an end when he thought proper. As for cases of persons committed for disrespect to a court, it could not but be within the knowledge of the hon. member, that such individuals were always, after a
811
Mr. Secretary Peel
begged to disclaim any idea, of apportioning certain quantities of imprisonment to the liquidation of certain penalties. The lenity of the Crown would always be freely dispensed, but it could be dispensed only with a due regard to the circumstances of particular cases. Some portion of imprisonment, where a fine was not paid, became absolutely necessary; because, if fines were not exacted, they would of course cease to be paid altogether.
Dr. Lushington
thought the present course, where persons refused to obey an order of court, inconvenient and ineffective. It frequently happened, that a man, under sentence for contempt, spent his money in prison, defrauding the party who was entitled to it. He thought it would be better where a man refused to execute any deed or settlement, that the judge should have power to execute it in his name.
Mr. Ricardo
objected to the imposition of a fine by a judge, afterwards to be remitted by a secretary of state. A judge might as well pass but one sentence—say death—for all crimes, and leave the government
812
The motions were agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, April 11, 1823.
RIOTS IN THE DUBLIN THEATRE—PETITION OF THE GRAND JURY, COMPLAINING OF IMPUTATIONS ON THEIR CONDUCT.]
Mr. Wetherell
said, he had been requested to present a petition from the Grand Jury of the city of Dublin, in the absence of the members for that city, one of whom was attending, his duties in Ireland. He had only yesterday received a letter requesting him to present the petition. There would not have been time to write to Dublin, and to receive an answer before Tuesday next, which was the day appointed for the motion of the hon. member for Armagh (Mr. Brownlow), otherwise he should have felt it is duty to inform the parties from whom he had received the petition, that he could do no more than merely present it to the House. The conduct of the grand jury to which the petition referred would form a distinct part of the debate on Tuesday next; and therefore he should be unwilling to anticipate the discussion upon that subject. The petition having, however, been placed in his hands for presentation, it would have been uncourteous on his part to refuse to bring it under the notice of the House, although he would not pledge himself to any particular line of conduct hereafter. The petition complained of some observations which had been made by the attorney-general for Ireland upon the conduct of the grand jury of Dublin, after they had thrown out the bills which that learned gentleman had preferred against the rioters in the Dublin theatre.
The petition was brought up, and read, as follows:
"To the Right Honourable and Honourable the Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled.
"The Petition of the Grand Jury of the County of the City of Dublin, at a Commission of Oyer, and Terminer, held at Green-street, on the 1st of January, 1823,
813
"Humbly Sheweth—That your petitioners having been impanelled and sworn on the 1st day of January last, were charged by Mr. Justice Moore, the senior and presiding judge at the commission, and were by him apprised, that in the course of their official duties bills of indictments would be preferred to them against persons charged with having participated in the Riots which were alleged to have occurred at the Theatre Royal on the 14th of December, 1822, in the presence of his excellency the lord-lieutenant. That his lordship did most particularly impress on your petitioners the imperious necessity of confining their attention to the evidence that should be submitted to them, and discharging from their minds any impression which they might previously have received from the public rumour. That bills of indictment were on the 1st day of the commission preferred to your petitioners against ten persons, by which they were charged with a conspiracy to riot, and assault, and insult his excellency the lord-lieutenant, at the theatre royal, and by which they were also charged with having committed a riot in his excellency's presence.
"That, in support of those indictments, a great number of witnesses were sent to your petitioners, who, not being able to close the said examination on the 1st, adjourned to the 2nd of January, when, after examining other witnesses, and deliberating on the evidence, they ignored the bills for a conspiracy against all the parties, and ignored the bill for a riot against all of them, except George Graham and Henry Handwich, as to whom they found the bill.
"That your petitioners are informed, and will be able to prove, that as soon as the proceedings were communicated to his majesty's attorney-general, who was then in court, and engaged in an important prosecution, he rose and addressed the bench, in substance, as follows:—'My Lords—Upon a case the most interesting that ever occurred in this country, two bills of indictment have been sent up to the grand jury of the city of Dublin against five persons; one set of bills charging a conspiracy to cause a riot at the theatre, in which the person of the lord-lieutenant was outraged and insulted, the other bills charging a riot generally. Upon the first indictment the grand jury of the city of Dublin have ignored the bills against all parties. Upon the second indictment they
814
ex officio
"That the petitioners were not present at the delivery of the Address, nor were they until Saturday, the 4th of January, able to satisfy themselves that the above statement of it was substantially correct.
"That they heard that one of the learned judges had, on Friday, the 3rd, expressed
815
"That the petitioners, though fully satisfied that the language of the attorney-general was calculated to impress every one who heard it with the conviction that he intended to impute to them, not an error of judgment, but a violation of their oaths, did yet believe it possible that there was some mistake in the Report of his observations, and they, therefore, determined to address the court in terms of remonstrance, which, at the same time that they should unequivocally repel the charge of corruption, should leave room for explanation, and enable the attorney-general to do them the justice of withdrawing the heavy charge which his address, as reported, was manifestly calculated to convey.
"That, under the influence of those feelings, they on Monday the 6th of Jan. addressed the court by their foreman in the following words:—
"'My lords;—We the commission, grand jury of Oyer and Terminer of the county of the city of Dublin, have learned with deep regret, that the discharge of our official duties with respect to certain bills of indictment has been made a subject of animadversion by his majesty's attorney-general, and has been pronounced by this high court to have been a matter of surprise; we hope, that neither the court, nor, with its sanction, his majesty's first law officer, intended to convey an imputation that our judgment was influenced by fear, favour, or affection. A charge of such a nature, without adverting to the enormity of the crime which it would impute, would be essentially unjust, for our oath of secrecy which forbids the disclosure of the grounds of our judgment, would render the vindication of that judgment, and if necessary the satisfactory refutation of such a charge, impossible. It must be recollected, that to us exclusively is the evidence known on which our judgment was founded, and they therefore trust, that
816
"That the presiding judge, Mr. Justice Moore, having been pleased to express his approbation of the manner and substance of their remonstrance, and to declare, that, as far as related to what had fallen from the Bench, the language of the court had been grossly misrepresented, your petitioners feel themselves no longer entitled to impute to his lordship any intention of censuring their conduct.
"That this remonstrance, thus publicly made in open court, has, as your petitioners believe, been communicated to his majesty's attorney-general, whose omission to notice or reply to it, induces them to conclude that the charge intimated by his observations is persisted in: and, under the circumstances, your petitioners are advised that a petition to parliament is the only course by which they can constitutionally obtain any sort of redress. They do, therefore, humbly submit, that the address of his majesty's attorney-general, though it professes not to arraign, does, in fact and in substance, arraign your petitioners; that it does most distinctly declare, that the case was one in which the foulest conspiracy had been fully demonstrated; that these unwarrantable reflections of his majesty's attorney-general press with the greatest severity and weight on your petitioners, because by the law of the land they are deprived of the means of demonstrating their injustice; bound by the solemn obligation of an oath to the observance of secrecy, they are not at liberty to divulge the nature of the evidence they have heard, or the reasons of the judgment they have pronounced. That the address of the attorney-general, in addition to the general charge of corruption against your petitioners, contained an insinuation that they had found bills for a riot against two only of the prisoners indicted, with a knowledge that by the rules of law such finding would be abortive, and with a criminal design of defeating any further proceedings thereon.
817
(Signed) "GEORGE WHITEFORD.
"Dublin, 7th of April, 1823."
Mr. Plunkett
said, he could not, in justice to his own character, allow the allegations of the petition to pass without observation. The petition contained a statement which was calculated to produce an impression upon that House, that he, in the discharge of his duty as a public functionary, had imputed corrupt motives to the grand jury. It might, perhaps, be sufficient for him to leave that part of the charge against him, to the consideration of those who had heard the words imputed to him in the petition itself; for he was sure, that all who heard them must see that they conveyed no such meaning as that which the petitioners had ascribed to them. He would very shortly state the facts to the House, as they had really occurred. An indictment was presented to the grand jury for a conspiracy to cause a riot at the theatre, by which the person of the lord lieutenant was outraged and insulted; that indictment, the grand jury, acting upon their oaths, did not find. Other indictments were then presented to them for a riot and assault generally. These indictments contained two counts: the grand jury refused to find bills on the first count, but found them on the second, in such a manner, however, as to render their finding totally inoperative. When the
818
ex officio
819
820
ex officio.
ex officio
821
822
vice versa;
cum multis aliis
cum multis aliis.
cum multis aliis
The petition was laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed.
MILITARY AND NAVAL PENSIONS
On the order of the day for going into a committee on this bill,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he did not think it necessary on the present occasion to argue over again, the policy of the arrangement which had been made for apportioning the burthen occasioned by the naval and military pensions, and also by the civil superannuations. He deemed it, however, to be necessary to say a few words, regarding the arrangement which had been made on the recent bargain with the Bank. It would not have been necessary to trouble the House at all upon this occasion, had it not been for the imperfect manner in which the act of last session was worded. The words used seemed to exclude the trustees from making a bargain for a longer period than one year; whereas, the meaning of them was, that a larger sum of money should not be brought into the
823
l.
l.
s.
d.;
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.
l.
l.;
l.
s.
d.
Mr. Grenfell
said, it would be in the recollection of the House, that on the first appearance of this bill, he had given notice that he would propose its rejection and would take the sense of the House upon it. He now rose in pursuance o his promise to move, that the House do resolve itself into a committee on this bill upon that day six months. He was no prepared to quarrel with the terms of the arrangement; but he would say, that the right hon. gentleman was not justified in making such an arrangement with an public body whatsoever for more than one
824
l.
825
Mr. Haldimand
supported the amendment, and contended that the measure was a mere delusion, intended to throw dust in the eyes of two classes of persons—those who desired a reduction of taxation, and those who wished to support public credit by means of a sinking fund.
Sir F. Blake
expressed his surprise, that the present chancellor of the exchequer should have adopted this ricketty, ill-formed bantling of his predecessor. He would oppose the measure, because it militated against the chancellor of the exchequer's own principle, of not having any sinking fund, but what arose from surplus revenue. It was nothing but a legerdemain trick, to give with one hand and take away with the other. It was called the dead-weight bill; and indeed, it would be found a dead weight, to clog the wheels of government. It was
"a monster of such frightful mien, "That to be hated, needs but to be seen."
Mr. Hume
said, he should like to know whether the chancellor of the exchequer had at all considered in what situation the public was likely to be at the termination of this annuity transaction? He had expected the right hon. gentleman to take some pains to show that, at the end of the
826
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
827
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
Mr. Maberly
said, he had expected, but in vain, to hear of some bonus and great advantage to result from the measure, from allowing all at once the Bank to become a purchaser of stock. He did think some good reason should be given for departing front this long established principle.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that public competition had been invited and nobody had bid, neither corporations nor individuals. It was only when this attempt had failed that recourse was had to the Bank. There was no reason to suppose that if an offer had been publicly made this year, that it would have been accepted. The transaction was not a job: it had been openly and fairly conducted.
828
Mr. Baring
objected to giving to the Bank the power of stock-jobbing. He complained that the whole transaction was unintelligible, and that great loss would result to the country therefrom. Setting aside the absurdity of the measure, he believed it was a had bargain, and intended to deceive two classes of persons. The very fact stated by the chancellor of the exchequer, that nobody would bid for the annuities; was a proof of its absurdity. There was no want of capital in the country; there was in fact a great abundance of money; and when the offer of the chancellor found no bidders, it was a proof that his plan was a had one. He had hoped that the candour which distinguished the right hon. gentleman would have induced him to yield to the general feeling which prevailed on this subject he effect of the measure would be, to erect the Bank into a company of stockjobbers, and though he was not prepared to say that circumstances might not exist in which it might be expedient for the Bank to become purchasers of the public securities, yet he thought such a measure ought not to be resorted to without the strongest necessity. Another objection to this measure was, the time at which the government had made the bargain with the Bank. The three per cents were a short time ago, up at 83, but they had subsequently fallen to 73, from the probability of this country being involved in a war; and it was at the period of their lowest depression that the right hon. gentleman had thought proper to make his bargain with the Bank. Nor had the right hon. gentleman contented himself with merely making the bargain for the year; but, to show that the plan was perfectly feasible, and that it involved no bubble or delusion, he had made the contract for five years. The conduct of the government was equally improvident and ridiculous, whether we were likely to be embarked in a war or not. If we were not likely to go to war, there was every reason to suppose that the funds would recover, and the time for making the bargain was most improvidently chosen. If, on the other hand, this country were likely to be involved in the contest, then we were encumbering with this vast operation, the very institution to whose efforts we should look for the means of carrying on the war. In every point of view he could not but regard this measure as the most un-
829
Mr. Huskisson
said, the observations of the hon. member might have been applied well enough, in point of time, either to the principle of the measure when it was originated by the late chancellor of the exchequer, or to the discussions on the sinking fund which had taken place before the recess; but they were wholly irrelevant to the present question, which merely regarded the ratification of a particular contract with the Bank. He thought, that in the discussions which had taken place on the new-modelling of the sinking fund, the principle of the measure had been generally understood and agreed to by the House. With regard to the power of the Bank to hold stock, it must be in the recollection of the hon. mover, that the Bank held a million of the loyalty loan in the last war. In the present case, the Bank might keep the whole of the long annuities, and divide them among the proprietors of Bank stock, as in the instance of the loyalty loan. As to the time at which the bargain was made, the government could only take the market as they found it, in any transaction of this nature. It was impossible for them to determine whether the funds were likely to be higher or lower at any future period.
Mr. Grenfell
said, it was true that the Bank held a million of the loyalty loan in the last war; but, a short time after the contract was concluded, it was suggested to them by their own solicitor, that it was made in direct violation of their charter, and they, therefore, divided the whole of the loan among the proprietors. In the present bill, however, there were two clauses; one expressly authorising the Bank to hold, and another to sell stock.
The House divided: For the amendment, 44. For the original motion, 55. The House then went into a committee on the bill.
IRISH MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES—PROTESTANT CHARTER SCHOOLS—FEMALE ORPHAN HOUSE—CORK INSTITUTION—ROYAL DUBLIN SOCIETY—GLEBE HOUSES.]
The House having resolved itself into a committee of supply to which the Irish Miscellaneous Estimates were referred. Mr. Goulburn moved, "That 17,000
l.
830
Mr. Hume
said, he had expected to see a considerable reduction in the Irish estimates of the present year. He regretted that he did not see upon the table certain returns for which he had moved, showing the revenue and expenditure of Ireland during the last three years. From those papers, when produced, it would appear that the expenditure of Ireland exceeded her revenue by 2,500,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Goulburn
said, it was true that this vote was for an establishment for Protestant education; but it was not exclusively for the benefit of Protestants. It was an establishment in the strictest and most general sense charitable. So far from interfering with the duties of parents, the greater portion of the children were orphans.
831
Sir J. Newport
thought there might be a more judicious application of the grants for the education of the Irish people, and hoped to see some beneficial alteration. He thought it would be advisable to reduce the number of scholars on the establishment, which was too exclusive and separate, and apply the grant to one of more general usefulness. Still, the modification must be left to the discretion of the public functionaries.
Mr. Goulburn
said, he would take the subject into his consideration, with a view to the adoption, if possible, of some more advantageous plan for the application of these grants. He did not think that more than a due proportion of these grants was allotted for the education of Protestant children.
Mr. Hume
said, that in consequence of the explanation which had been given, he would withdraw the amendment he had proposed, and substitute in its stead a resolution, that the grant should be reduced to 13,000
l.
l.
Mr. Hume
adverted to the periodical increase of the sums granted to this institution, as an illustration of the system of charitable grants to different institutions of Ireland. At the time of the Union, the grant was only for 500
l.
l.
Mr. Goulburn
protested against the general principle of the hon. member, that, because it was impossible to support the whole of the pauper population, no support of the kind should be bestowed.
Mr. Dawson
adverted to the great increase that had taken place in the population of Dublin and other parts of Ireland.
832
Mr. Grattan
disapproved altogether of any interference with the Irish charitable institutions: and bore his testimony to the judicious administration of the houses of industry in Dublin.
Mr. Monck
said, the hon. member for Aberdeen's proposition was perfectly correct. There was no distinction more obvious than that between duties of perfect and imperfect obligation. Nothing could be more unwise than an attempt to enforce, by legislative enactment, the performance of duties of imperfect obligation. The poor laws of England were a remarkable instance of this. His hon. friend did not propose that the children should be abandoned; but that they should be supported by the contributions of the rich, and not by the public purse. If the public performed this duty, it would have the effect of stifling the operation of charitable feeling, and would furnish an excuse to those who could afford it, to withhold their donations.
Sir J. Newport
said, that the Union having withdrawn the rich proprietors, prevented their charity from having that effect in Ireland which it would otherwise have. If the three millions annually brought over to England from Ireland, were expended in the latter country, not only would the poor be relieved, but every charitable establishment be adequately supported.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he could, from his own knowledge, assert, that more liberality, or a greater portion of charitable feeling, did not exist in any community than was to be found in Dublin. The hon. baronet had spoken of the disadvantages under which Ireland laboured, in consequence of the absence of many individuals of wealth and rank, whose duties obliged them to reside principally in this country. But there was another point which bore particularly hard on the city of Dublin. A great number of persons, from every part of Ireland, proceeded to Dublin, on their way to this country, where they hoped to procure a livelihood. The consequence was, that the poor of all sorts congregated there, and the ordinary sources of charity were inadequate to their support. He had himself officiated on charitable occasions in Dublin, and he never knew larger funds to be raised in any place for purposes of charity and benevolence. He had seen from 600
l.
l.
833
Mr. Hume
said, it was very true, that many Irish gentlemen came over to this country; but did their land come with them? Why should they not apply a portion of their revenues to the support of these charities? Why should the public be called on to supply the funds? Such charitable grants were really not beneficial. If we wished to make Ireland happy, we must give them education, revise the existing tithe system, and discourage, as much as possible, the tendency to become absentees.
Mr. Dawson
defended those Irish gentlemen whose public duties compelled them to remain in this country, from the imputation thrown out in so general a manner. If charities were to depend merely on individual bounty, we should soon have but few efficient charitable institutions. The resolution was agreed to. On the resolution, "That 2000
l.
Mr. Hume
asked why, if such an institution were good in Cork, it would not be equally good at Limerick, and other places? Why not, instead of burthening the public with the expense, let the persons who attended the lectures pay for them.
Sir J. Newport
defended the institution, and said it had done great service, not only to Cork, but to other parts of Ireland. When first established, however, he allowed it was expected that it would eventually support itself.
Mr. Hume
called on government to say, why the institution had not supported itself, and why the public were still called upon to support it.
Mr. Goulburn
contended, that the institution had greatly tended to the improvement of the various manufactures of Ireland. It was impossible that it could maintain itself, because the subordinate classes of the people who received instruction from it, had no means of allowing any remuneration for the advantage.
The resolution was agreed to. On the resolution, "That 7,000
l
Mr. Hume
said, he had last year taken the sense of the committee on this vote, because he conceived it to be money actually thrown away; and he was now more and more convinced, that the sum demanded, could not, as laid out by the society, operate any benefit to the coun-
834
Mr. Goulburn
said, the society was not merely founded for the purpose of preparing literary works, but to patronize lectures on different branches of art and science. There were six professors, who lectured on chemistry, botany, natural philosophy, &c. Those lectures were extremely well attended. Since professors had been appointed, many improvements in the useful arts had been effected, the benefit of which was felt by a large class of persons. There was another branch of the institution which had for its object the cultivation of the fine arts; and many individuals who had attained to great proficiency in those arts, owed their first advance to the instruction which they had received in that society. As soon as their funds allowed it, two students would be selected to prosecute the study of the fine arts in Rome.
Mr. Hume
said, the right hon. gentleman, when this subject was last before the committee, had appealed to the valuable publications that had been sent forth by the Dublin society, as a proof of the utility of that body. Where were those publications? He had indeed picked up some of their proceedings, and they certainly were the most childish proceedings he ever met with. He had the minutes of six of their proceedings, and they were really puerile. In one instance, a motion was made to pay 5
l.
l.
l.
s.
l.
l.
835
l.
l.
l.
Sir J. Newport
observed, that the efforts of the society had produced a great improvement in agriculture.
Mr. Hume
said, that when money was voted to an institution for one purpose, it ought not to be appropriated to another. If the improvement of agriculture was sought for, they had a Farming society, and why not directly vote money to them for that purpose?
l.
Lord A. Hamilton
did not rise to oppose the amount of the sum, but to express his dislike to the principle on which it was called for. The grant was for the establishment of the church of
836
Mr. Goulburn
said, that the noble lord seemed to imagine that this was a vote of 9,000
l.
Lord A. Hamilton
said, that his meaning was, not that the church service in Ireland was worse performed, but that in many instances it was not performed at
837
Mr. Goulburn
said, that lord Blaney's letter merely went to show, not that there was no service performed, but that there ought to have been a resident rector as well as curate.
Sir J. Newport
said, that the recommendation of lord Blaney to the bishop of the diocese appeared to have been made in vain, although backed by the entreaties of 300 of the protestant parishioners. He meant to oppose this vote on two grounds; the first was, that it went to augment the funds of the higher orders of the clergy of Ireland, who were already greatly overpaid, and who, if not bound by law, were yet bound in honour to defray those expenses incidental to the performance of their duties, more particularly when it was considered that the hierarchy of that church received out of the pockets of the people hundreds of thousands more of emolument than was received by any other clergy in Europe. Would the world believe, that the three principal personages of the Irish episcopacy, who had died within the last fifteen years, had bequeathed to their families upwards of 700,000
l.
l.
838
Mr. Hume
denied that the Irish government had reformed the abuses of the Irish established church, which he would contend remained at the present day, as notorious as they were when Mr. Grattan brought the subject before the Irish legislature. Since the year 1800, no less a sum than 703,994
l.
Mr. W. Smith
said, that were he a bishop, he would look upon the proposer of such grants as these as the worst friend of the established church, for the effect of such propositions must be, to alienate men's minds from the establishment. He had heard from undoubted authority that in Ireland the number of the catholics was increasing, while that of the protestants was on the decrease. Where, then, were the practical benefits conferred on Ireland by the church establishment, adequate to the enormous amount of its expense, and the contention for the payment of its tithes?
Mr. Grattan
confirmed the statement respecting the numerical decrease of the protestants, which he attributed to the manner of upholding the established church more by the amassing of enormous wealth than the adequate performance of religious duties. It was too much, under such circumstances, to come to parliament for grants which must be defrayed out of the pockets of the people, already too much oppressed by the intolerable weight of a system fraught with the elements of permanent disturbance in Ireland.
Mr. Goulburn
said, that the money for glebe-houses was only called for in advance; it was afterwards to be repaid to the public by the incumbents. The revenue of Ireland might not be equal to all the expenses of that kingdom; but the question ought to be considered with reference to the whole empire. It ought to be viewed, not so much one of a local as of a general nature. Wherever the government had built glebe-houses, and there had been a resident clergy, the effect had been to increase the num-
839
Sir J. Newport
observed, that, in the diocese of Ossory alone, from 1737 to 1302, there had been an amazing decrease of protestants. So lately as in 1816, there had been an instance in which six vicarages were united into one benefice. He pledged himself that next session he would move the House to go into a committee on the state of the established church in Ireland, and to consider the report of the bishops thereon.
The committee divided. For the resolution, 13, against it, 19.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, April 14, 1823.
NEGOTIATIONS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.]
The order of the day being read,
The Earl of Liverpool
rose and said:
*
*From the original edition printed for J. Hatchard and Son, Piccadilly.
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
"They are certainly calculated to irritate the government of Spain; to afford ground for a belief that advantage has been taken of the irritation existing between that government and France, to call down upon Spain the power of the alliance, and thus to embarrass still more the difficult position of the French government.
"The result of these communications will probably be, that the diplomatic relations between the three allied courts and Spain will be discontinued. Whatever may be the state of the questions between France and Spain, this occurrence cannot assist the cause of France; as those questions will stand upon their own ground, and the government of France must decide them upon their own merits.
"But these communications are not only calculated to embarrass the French government, but likewise that of the king, my master. His majesty feels sincerely for the king and the people of Spain; he is anxious to see a termination of the evils and misfortunes by which that country is afflicted; and that it should be prosperous and happy. His majesty likewise earnestly desires that the usual relations of amity and good neighbourhood may be re-established between France and Spain; and his majesty's government would have been anxious to co-operate with those of his allies, in allaying the existing irritation, and in preventing a possible rupture.
"But his majesty's government are of opinion, that to animadvert upon the internal transactions of an independent state, unless such transactions affect the essential interests of his majesty's subjects, is inconsistent with those principles on which his majesty has invariably acted on all questions relating to the internal concerns of other countries; that such animadversions, if made, must involve his majesty in serious responsibility, if they should produce any effect; and must irritate, if they should not: and, if addressed, as proposed, to the Spanish government, are likely to be injurious to the best interests of Spain, and to produce the worst consequences upon the probable discussions between that country and France.
"The king's government must therefore decline to advise his majesty to hold a common language with his allies upon this occasion: and it is so necessary for
850
"His majesty, therefore, must limit his exertions and good offices to the endeavours of his minister at Madrid, to allay the ferment which these communications must occasion, and to do all the good in his power."
external
851
852
casus foederis,
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
"Toto certatum est corpore regni."
863
for
864
865
866
867
868
Earl Grey
said, that the noble earl had
869
870
871
Lord King
said, that the whole course of the negotiation had been just such as might have been anticipated. It display-
872
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, April 14, 1823.
NEGOTIATIONS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.]
Mr. Secretary Canning
appeared at the bar. Being called upon by the Speaker, he said he held in his hand Papers, which be was commanded by his Majesty to present to the House. The said Papers being accordingly brought up,
Mr. Secretary Canning
rose. He said, that in moving that their titles be read, he should, with the permission of the House, take advantage of the opportunity afforded by that formal motion, to redeem the pledge which he had given some weeks ago, by stating succinctly the course of conduct which had been pursued by his majesty's government, and the principles by which that conduct had been guided, in the important and complicated transactions to which the documents referred. In doing so, he felt that he was discharging a duty as awfully important as could at any time devolve upon the servant of a great monarchy and the minister of a free people. He was to account to the representatives of that people, for the manner in which the honour of the Crown had been upheld, and the interests of the country consulted, in a crisis of perhaps unexampled difficulty, and of which the consequences were yet unascertained. He mentioned this last consideration, because it was impossible not to be sensible, how much it added to the arduous nature of the task imposed upon him. If, indeed, the complete issue of all that had been recently passing had been known, it would be necessary only to shape the explanation and defence to that issue so ascertained; but he felt that
873
874
875
publici juris,
malveillance
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
"It remains only to describe the conduct which it is his majesty's desire and intention to observe, in a conflict between two nations, to each of whom his majesty is bound by the ties of amity and alliance. The repeated disavowal, by his most Christian majesty's government, of all views of ambition and aggrandizement, forbids the suspicion of any design on the part of France to establish a permanent military occupation of Spain; or to force his Catholic majesty into any measures, derogatory to the independence of his crown, or to existing relations with other powers. The repeated assurances which his majesty has received, of the determination of France to respect the dominions of his most faithful majesty, relieve his majesty from any apprehension of being called upon to fulfil the obligations of that intimate defensive connexion which has so long subsisted between the crowns of Great Britain and Portugal
889
890
891
de jure
de facto;
892
893
894
895
896
897
Mr. Brougham
said, he rose on this occasion not so much for the purpose of entering into the discussion of the many momentous topics which the right hon. gentleman had introduced in the course of his speech, as to vindicate himself and the gentlemen near him in the eyes of the country, for not now proceeding with the discussion, animated as they were by many of the sentiments which had fallen from the right hon. gentleman—sentiments which reflected the highest honour on his character. There were, no doubt, very many persons who did not thoroughly understand, why so great an abstinence had been exhibited, and for so long a period, on his side of the House. That circumstance he would explain. He was one of those who, when he heard in a distant part of the country, where he was professionally engaged, the course of proceeding which the right hon. gentleman intended to follow, could not see the expediency of adopting that course. The right hon. gentleman did not produce the papers in the first instance, that gentlemen might read them; he reversed the practice, by defending his conduct first, and afterwards producing the papers on which that defence was founded. Now, he must say, that the unfavourable impression which that mode of proceeding had originally communicated to his mind, was not altogether removed by the right hon. gentleman's statement: for it did so happen, that, having attended to his speech with the greatest possible care, he found himself left in the dark, up to the present moment, as to the precise and specific line of conduct which his majesty's government had pursued. The right hon. gentleman said, that strict neutrality was what the government had intended: he said, that they would give no assistance to Spain, or to the invaders of Spain; but, as to what extent they had laboured to avert it, and as to what representations they had made at Verona or at Paris upon these points, he was left wholly in the dark. Nay, there were some parts of the right hon. gentleman's narrative, which, from the curious omissions observable, led him to a conclusion directly the reverse of that which other parts of the statement would induce him to form. The right hon. gentleman having passed over, with a lightness at which he greatly marvelled, whatsoever had been done at Verona—having given no account of what had been said by the duke of Wel-
898
hiatus valde deflendus
899
900
901
902
903
904
Mr. Canning
, in explanation, observed that the hon. and learned gentleman had quite misunderstood him in attributing to him the assertion, that the war was a desperate enterprise on the part of France. He had not said a word as to the possible result of the war on one side or the other. He looked forward with satisfaction, to any opportunity which might be afforded him of answering any objections which might be made to the course which had been pursued by his majesty's government, and with a perfect confidence, that if that conduct were tried by any of those tests to which the policy of governments in their foreign relations could be fairly subjected, they would be found to have been uniformly actuated by a respect for the independence of nations, the faith of treaties, and the honour and interest of the nation.
The papers were laid upon the table.
PAPERS CONCERNING THE NEGOTIATIONS
The following are copies of the Papers relative to Spain, which were laid, by his majesty's command, before both Houses of Parliament:
PAPERS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.
CLASS A.—VERONA AND PARIS.
No. 1.—The Duke of Wellington to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received September 24th.
(Extract.)
Paris, Sept.
I had a long discussion with M. de Villèle yesterday, on the relations of this government with Spain. It appears, that for a considerable time past, I believe since the alarm of infectious fever in Spain, the French government have been collecting the troops in the southern departments of France. They have not, however, on the immediate frontier, a larger body of men than are sufficient for the performance of the duties of the "Cordon Sanitaire," so long as that precaution is necessary, in consequence of the prevalence of the fever in the neighbouring provinces of Spain; or than can fairly be deemed necessary for the purposes of observation of a country which is the seat of a civil war, and for the protection of the French frontier from insult, by the different parties in operation immediately on the borders.
M. de Villèle said, that the assembly of the Congress at the present moment, was not matter of indifference, in relation to the situation of affairs in Spain, or to that in which the two countries stood towards each other. There was no doubt that expectations were formed respecting the result of the deliberations of the Congress on the affairs of Spain, as well in Spain as elsewhere; and that if the
905
M. de Villèle wished that the Congress should take into consideration the actual position of the French government in relation to Spain; and the hypothesis under which they might, be forced into a war; and that the four other powers of the alliance should declare what line they would each take, in case of the occurrence of any of the events which they conceived would force them to war. I told M. de Villèle that it would be quite impossible for us to declare beforehand what would be our conduct upon any hypothetical case.
I should wish to receive his majesty's instructions what line I shall take, and what arguments I shall use, in case the French government should make the proposition at the Congress, which M. de Villèle has made to me, respecting a declaration by the allies.
No. 2.—Mr. Secretary Canning to the Duke of Wellington.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office, Sept.
If there be a determined project to interfere by force or by menace in the present struggle in Spain, so convinced are his majesty's government of the uselessness and danger of any such interference—so objectionable does it appear to them in principle, as well as utterly impracticable in execution, that when the necessity arises, or (I would rather say) when the opportunity offers, I am to instruct your grace at once frankly and peremptorily to declare, that to any such interference, come what may, his majesty will not be a party.
No. 3.—The Duke of Wellington to Mr. Secretary Canning.
(Extract.)
Verona, Oct.
We had a conference on Sunday night, at which the French minister, M. de Montmorency read a paper of which I inclose a copy. I imagine that each of the ministers will answer this paper. In my answer, I shall review our line of conduct since April 1820; and shall decline to engage ourselves to adopt any measure beforehand, or till we shall have a full knowledge of all the circumstances which have occurred between the two countries. I propose, besides, to point out, that, considering the relative position of France and Spain, it is not probable that Spain will declare against them; if they explain, as they ought, the meaning and object of their corps of observation, and make some allowance for the state of effervescence of men's minds in Spain in a state of revolution and civil war.
(Translation of Enclosure in No. 3.)—Questions addressed by the French Plenipotentiary to the Plenipotentiaries of Austria, Prussia, Russia, and Great Britain.
Verona, October
1. In case France should find herself under
906
2. Should war break out between France and Spain, under what form and by what acts would the high powers afford to France, that moral support which would give to her measures the weight and authority of the alliance, and inspire a salutary dread into the revolutionists of all countries?
3. What, in short, is the intention of the high powers as to the extent and the form of the effective assistance, ("
secours matériels,
No. 4.—The Duke of Wellington to; Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received November 14th.
(Extract.)
Verona, Nov.
Prince Metternich called together a conference of the five cabinet ministers of Wednesday evening, at which were delivered in answers to the demands of the French minister on the 20th ultimo, from the Russian, Austrian and Prussian ministers; and that from myself, a copy of which I inclose.
(Inclosure in No. 4.) Memorandum.—Answer of the Duke of Wellington to the Questions of the French Plenipotentiary.
Verona, October
Since the month of April 1820, the British government have availed themselves of every opportunity of recommending to his majesty's allies to abstain from all interference in the internal affairs of Spain.
Without adverting to those principles which his majesty's government must always consider the rule of their conduct, in relation to the internal affairs of other countries, they considered that to whatever degree either the origin of the Spanish revolution, the system then established, or the conduct of those who have since had the management of the internal affairs of Spain might be disapproved of, any amelioration which might be desired in the Spanish system, for the sake of Spain herself, ought to be sought for in measures to be adopted in Spain, rather than abroad; and particularly in the confidence which the people should be taught to feel in the character and measures of the king.
They considered that an interference, with a view to assist the monarch on the throne, to overturn that which had been settled, and which he had guaranteed, or to promote the establishment of any other form of government or constitution, particularly by force, would, only place that monarch in a false position, and prevent him from looking to the internal means of amelioration which might be within his reach.
Such an interference always appeared to the British government an unnecessary assumption
907
Upon these principles his majesty has advised his allies, and has acted himself, from the month of April 1820, to the present day.
The protocols and other acts of the Congress at Aix-la-Chapelle, which established the union at present existing between the five powers, so happily for the world, require the most unlimited confidence and communication on the part of each; and accordingly, his majesty has never failed to communicate to his allies, and Particularly to France, every instruction which he has sent to his minister at Madrid; and all the communications made by his majesty's commands to the minister of Spain residing in London:—all in the same spirit of good-will towards, the king of Spain and the Spanish Nation.
It is impossible to look at the existing relations between France and Spain, adverting to what has passed from the commencement of the year 1820, to the present moment, without being sensible of the unfortunately false position in which the king of Spain is placed; and that the spirit of party in both countries, having aggravated the national antipathy which antecedent circumstances had occasioned, is in a great measure the cause of the unfortunate irritation in Spain against France, to which his excellency the minister of France has adverted. The great object of his majesty's foreign policy is, to preserve peace among nations; he feels the most anxious interest for the happiness of his Catholic majesty, and the honour of his government; and it would be his sincere desire to allay that irritation.
But the British government cannot but feel, that to make any declaration on any of the three points referred to by his excellency, without a previous accurate knowledge of all the circumstances which have occurred between the two countries, would be not only premature and unjust, but would probably be unavailing; and would, in fact, deprive his majesty of the power of discussing and deciding upon the measures of his own government in this affair hereafter, when he should be better informed. His majesty must either place himself in this painful position, or he must do, what would be equally painful to his feelings, require from his august friend and ally the king of France, that he should submit his conduct to the advice and control of his majesty.
His majesty's government cannot think either alternative to be necessary; but are of opinion that a review of the obvious circumstances of the situation of France, as well as Spain, will show, that whatever may be the tone assumed towards France by the ruling powers in Spain, they are not in a state to carry into execution any plan of real hostility.
Considering that a civil was exists in the
908
His Britannic majesty sincerely wishes that this measure may be effectual in attaining the objects for which it is calculated; and that the wisdom of the French government will have induced them to explain it at Madrid, in such terms as will satisfy the government of his Catholic majesty of its necessity.
Such an explanation will, it is hoped, tend to allay in some degree the irritation against France; and, on the other hand, it may be hoped that some allowance will he made in France for the state of effervescence of men's minds in Spain, in the very crisis of a revolution and civil war.
A moment's reflection upon the relative power of the two states will show, that the real evil to which his most Christian majesty is exposed, is that resulting from the operations of the civil war on the neighbouring frontier of Spain; against which the measure which his government have adopted is best calculated to preserve him.
Even revolutionary madness could not calculate upon the success of a serious attack by Spain upon France, under any circumstances, which it is possible to suppose to exist at present in the latter kingdom.—But the attention of the Spanish government is now occupied by a civil war, the operations of which certainly justify the formation of a corps of observation in France; and it is not very probable that they would, at this moment, desire to break with France.
Neither is it to be believed that, in their present situation, they would not desire still to enjoy the advantage of that countenance to their system, which the presence of the French ambassador at the seat of government must afford them.
His majesty therefore considers any rupture by Spain, or any measure on her part which may render necessary the immediate discontinuance of diplomatic relations by France, very improbable: and as his majesty is quite unacquainted with what has passed between France and Spain since the month of April, 1820; and his government cannot know upon what grounds his most Christian majesty's government may think proper to discontinue the diplomatic relations of France with Spain; or upon what grounds was may break out between the two countries; it is impossible for them now to pronounce what advice they should consider it their duty to give to his majesty, in case either or both of those events should occur.
909
His majesty most anxiously wishes that such extremities may be avoided; and he feels convinced that the government of his most Christian majesty will find means of avoiding them.
No. 5.—The Duke of Wellington to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received Nov. 21.
(Extract.)
Verona, November
I have little to report as having occurred on the Spanish question, since I wrote to you on the 5th inst. But I inclose to you a memorandum on what is passing here, which I send to sir Charles Stuart by this occasion.
(Inclosure in No. 5.)—Memorandum.
(Extract.)
Verona, November
On the 20th of October, the French minister gave in a paper, requiring from the ministers of the allies to know, whether, if France should be under the necessity of withdrawing her minister from Spain, the other allied powers would do the same? In case France should be involved in war with Spain, what countenance the allies would give the former? And in case France should require it, what assistance?
To these questions the three continental allies answered on the 30th of October, that they would act as France should, in respect to their ministers in Spain, and would give to France every countenance and assistance she should require—the cause for such assistance, and the period and the mode of giving it, being reserved to be specified in a treaty.
The minister of Great Britain answered, that having no knowledge of the cause of dispute, and not being able to form a judgment upon an hypothetical case, he could give no answer to any of the questions.
The mode of communicating with Spain was considered on the 31st, with a view to prevent a rupture between France and Spain. It was agreed that the minister of each of the four continental courts at Madrid should present a separate note of the same tenor, and drawn upon the same principles; and on the 1st of November it was settled, that the four courts should draw up their notes and communicate them to the British minister; who should, upon seeing these notes, make known the line which his court would take.
Since that meeting, it is understood that the plan of proceeding proposed and agreed to, has been altered. Instead of official notes to be presented by the several ministers at Madrid to the Spanish government, it is now intended that dispatches shall be written to those ministers respectively, in which the several courts will express their wishes and intentions: this mode of proceeding is adopted, as affording greater latitude for discussion and explanation than that by official notes.
Accordingly M. de Montmorency has prepared the draft of his dispatch; and it is understood that the ministers of the continental powers are preparing theirs. These are the facts which have occurred at the existing Con-
910
external
No. 6.—The Duke of Wellington to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received, Dec. 6.
(Extract.)
Verona, November
I inclose the minute of the answer which I returned to the ministers of the allies on the 20th inst. when they communicated to me the dispatches which they proposed to write to the ministers of their several courts at Madrid.
Minute.—(Inclosure in No. 6.)
Verona, November
When the ministers of the five courts last assembled on the 1st instant, the object of their common solicitude was, to allay the irritation existing in Spain against France, and to prevent a possible rupture between the two powers.
Although his majesty's government did not consider themselves sufficiently informed, either of what had already taken place between France and Spain, or of what might occasion a rupture, to be able to answer in the affirmative, the questions submitted to the conference by his excellency the minister of France; yet, knowing the anxiety of the king, my master, for the honour of his most Christian majesty, and for the preservation of the peace of the world, I was willing to cuter into the consideration of the measures proposed, with, a view to attain our common object.
It was settled, that the notes to be prepared according to the proposition of his highness the Austrian minister, and to be presented to the Spanish government on this occasion, should be communicated to me, in order that I might see, whether, consistently With the view which the king had invariably taken of the affairs of Spain, and with the principles which had governed his majesty's conduct in relation to the internal concerns of other countries, his majesty's government could take any part which might forward the common purpose of preserving the general tranquillity.
The ministers of the allied courts have thought proper to make known to Spain the sentiments of their respective sovereigns, by dispatches addressed to the ministers of their several courts, residing at Madrid, instead of by official notes—as a mode of communication less formal, and affording, greater facility of discussion.
These dispatches, it appears, are to be communicated
in extenso
911
The origin, circumstances, and consequences of the Spanish revolution,—the existing state of affairs in Spain,—and the conduct of those who have been at the head of the Spanish government may have endangered the safety of other countries, and may have excited the uneasiness of the governments, whose ministers I am now addressing; and those governments may think it necessary to address the Spanish government upon the topics referred to in these dispatches.
There sentiments and opinions have certainly been entertained by the three cabinets of Austria, Prussia, and Russia, for a considerable period of time; and the British government duly appreciates the forbearance and deference for the opinions of other cabinets, which have dictated the delay to make these communications, to the present moment. But having been delayed till now, I would request those ministers to consider, whether this is the moment at which such remonstrances ought to be made; whether they are calculated to allay the irritation against France, and to prevent a possible rupture; and whether they might not with advantage be delayed to a later period.
They are certainly calculated to irritate the government of Spain; to afford ground for a belief that advantage has been taken of the irritation existing between that government and France, to call down upon Spain the power of the alliance; and thus to embarrass still more the difficult position of the French government.
The result of these communications will probably be, that the diplomatic relations between the three allied courts and Spain will be discontinued—whatever may be the state of the questions between France and Spain: this occurrence cannot assist the cause of France; as those questions will stand upon their own ground, and the government of France must decide them upon their own merits.
But these communications are not only calculated to embarrass the French government, but likewise that of the king, my master. His majesty feels sincerely for the king and the people of Spain; he is anxious to see a termination of the evils and misfortunes by which that country is afflicted; and that it should be prosperous and happy. His majesty likewise earnestly desires, that the usual relations of amity and good neighbourhood may be reestablished between France and Spain; and his majesty's government would have been anxious to co-operate with those of his allies, in allaying the existing irritation, and in preventing a possible rupture.
But his majesty's government are of opinion, that to animadvert upon the internal transactions of an independent state, unless such transactions affect the essential interests of his majesty's subjects, is inconsistent with those principles on which his majesty has invariably acted on all questions relating to the internal concerns of other countries; that such animadversions, if made, must involve his ma-
912
The king's government must, therefore, decline to advise his majesty to hold a common language with his allies upon this occasion: and it is so necessary for his majesty, not to be supposed to participate in a measure of this description, and calculated to produce such consequences, that his government must equally refrain from advising his majesty to direct that any communication should be made to the Spanish government, on the subject of its relations with France.
His majesty, therefore, must limit his exertions and good offices, to the endeavours of his minister at Madrid to allay the ferment which these communications must occasion, and to do all the good in his power.
No. 7.—Mr. Secretary Canning to the duke of Wellington.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office, Dec.
The latest date of your grace's dispatches from Verona is the 19th ultimo. The French mail due yesterday, has, from some unaccountable accident failed to arrive; and we are left in an uncertainty, as to every thing that has passed at Verona for more than a fortnight. In this state of things, however difficult it may be to shape instructions to a case not ascertained, it has nevertheless been felt by his majesty's advisers, that we should be wanting to our duty, if we did not submit to his majesty the course which it would be expedient to pursue, in that which is understood to be the present situation of the question of peace or war between France and Spain.
M. de Villèle has taken several opportunities of expressing to sir Charles Stuart his own earnest desire for the preservation of peace; and his wish to receive, not only the support but the advice of the British government, in his endeavours to preserve it.
I have the king's commands to signify to your grace his majesty's pleasure, that your grace should seek a conversation with M. de Villèle; and, after referring to his excellency's communications through sir Charles Stuart, should offer to that minister the mediation of his majesty, between their most Christian and Catholic majesties.
It will not escape your grace's observation, that in order to afford a prospect of success in our mediation, if France should be willing to employ it, there should be some reasonable hope of a similar acceptance on the part of Spain.
I inclose to your grace an extract of a despatch from the Spanish government its Chargé d'Affaires in London, which was read and delivered to me by Mr. de Colomb in a conference the day before yesterday.
913
The remaining part of the despatch to M. de Colomb (with which I do not trouble your grace on this occasion) relates to the questions pending between the two governments, respecting commercial grievances, and the piracies in the West Indian seas.
(Inclosure in No. 7.)—Translation.—Extract of a despatch addressed by M. San Miguel, minister for foreign affairs at Madrid, to M. de Colomb, dated November 15, 1822.
The government of his majesty has received with gratitude, but without surprise, the verbal communication, purporting that the cabinet of Ins Britannic majesty, respecting the independence and the political institutions adopted by the [Spanish] nation, is determined not to interfere in our domestic affairs.
Nothing else could be expected from the government of a nation which like the British, knows its rights and the primordial principles of public law; and it is only to be wondered at, that it should not think it expedient to give to a declaration of such obvious justice the solemnity which it deserves.
The ties of intimate regard, the principles of mutual convenience and the analogy of the respective institutions which exist in Spain and in England—do they not positively entitle the former, overwhelmed with difficulties, to expect from the latter, whose political influence is of the greatest weight, something more than simple and abstract justice, something more than a passive respect for universal laws, than a cold and insensible neutrality? And if some tender interest, such as befits two nations in similar circumstances, exists in the court of London, how is it that it does not manifest itself in visible acts of friendly interposition to save its ally from evils, in which humanity, wisdom, and even cautious and provident state policy will sympathize? Or how is it that (if these benevolent acts exist) they are not communicated to the cabinet of his Catholic majesty?
The acts to which I allude, would in no wise compromise the most strictly conceived system of neutrality. Good offices, counsels, the reflections of one friend in favour of another, do not place a nation in concert of attack or defence with another, do not expose it to the enmity of the opposite party, even if they do not deserve its gratitude—they are not (in a word) effective aid, troops, arms, subsidies, which augment the force of one of the contending parties. It is of reason only that we are speaking, and it is with the pen of conciliation that a power, situated like Great Britain, might support Spain, without exposing herself to take part in a war, which she may perhaps prevent with general utility.
England might act, in this manner; being able, ought she so to act? and if she has she acted so? In the wise, just, and generous views of the government St. James, no other answer can exist than the affirmative. Why then does she not notify to Spain what
914
en aquel sentido mediator
Nevertheless, in such uncertainty of what she has to thank the British ministry for, the government of his Catholic majesty thinks itself bound to manifest, in the face of the world, in order that it may regard its profession of faith, that whilst it respects the rights of others, it will never admit the least intervention in its internal concerns, nor execute an act which may compromise in the least the free exercise of national sovereignty.
When once you shall have communicated these frank declarations to the right hon. George Canning, his excellency cannot do less than find them worthy of his flattering concurrence, as well in substance as in form, and must correspond cordially with the spirit which has dictated them; and it will be sufficient that you should terminate your discourse, by reminding his excellency that Spain has been almost always, in her political relations, the victim of her probity and good faith; that her friendship has been, and is useful to other nations, and sincere under every trial; that the government of his majesty is desirous to preserve the friendly ties which exist between Spain and England, but without the diminution, without the degradation of its dignity, and that, if it has to struggle with the embarrassments that result from its immense progressive losses, the Spanish people always possesses sublimity of sentiment to conduct itself with honour, strength of character to support its calamities, and constancy of resolution to maintain itself in spite of the last sacrifices, in the post which belongs to her in Europe.
No. 8.—The Duke of Wellington to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received December 11.
(Extract.)
Paris, December
I arrived here this afternoon, and received your despatch of the 6th inst. I have since had an interview with M. de Villéle and I have the pleasure to inform you, that he has sent a messenger to Verona with orders to the French ministers at that place, to express the desire of the French government, that the transmission of the despatches to Madrid should be suspended.
No. 9. — Mr. Secretary Canning to the Duke of Wellington.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office,
Your grace's despatches of Tuesday have been received and laid before the king. The step taken by M. de Villéle, in referring back to Verona the consideration of the despatches proposed to be sent by the three continental courts to their several ministers at Madrid, with a view of inducing the three courts to
915
No. 10.—The Duke of Wellington to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received December 22.
(Extract.)
Paris, December
I waited upon M. de Montmorency this day, and presented to him the note of which I inclose a copy.
(Inclosure in No. 10.) The Duke of Wellington to M. de Montmorency.
Paris, December
The undersigned, his Britannic majesty's plenipotentiary, has explained and recorded, in the conferences of Verona, the sentiments of his government upon the present critical state of affairs between France and Spain; and the earnest solicitude of the king his master, to avert a war of which no human foresight can calculate the consequences.
Upon his arrival at Paris, the undersigned found instructions from his government, to offer to his most Christian majesty the mediation of the king his master, before the decisive step should have been taken, of transmitting to Madrid the despatches written at Verona.
The undersigned rejoiced at the delay which had been interposed to the transmission of those despatches to Madrid, by the reference to Verona; and his government have learnt, with the liveliest satisfaction, the determination of the French government to reconsider a measure which the undersigned had so anxiously deprecated.
It is the sincere hope of his majesty, that this salutary reconsideration may prevent recourse to arms. But, as the issue of the reference to Verona may still be doubtful, the undersigned is instructed to declare, that, if the answer to that reference should not be such as to preclude all danger of hostilities, his majesty will be ready to accept the office of mediator between the French and Spanish governments; and to employ his most strenuous endeavours for the adjustment of their
916
(Signed) WELLINGTON.
No. 11.—(Translation.) Note from the Duke of Montmorency to the Duke of Wellington, dated Paris the 26th Dec. 1822.
The undersigned minister for foreign affairs has received and laid before the king, the note which his excellency the duke of Wellington did him the honour to address to him on the 17th of this month.
His majesty has appreciated the sentiments which have induced the king of England to offer his mediation to his majesty, in order to prevent a rupture between him and the Spanish government. But his majesty could not but feel that the situation of France with regard to Spain, was not of a nature to call for a mediation between the two courts. In fact, there exists no difference between them, no specific point of discussion, by the arrangement of which their relations might be placed on the footing on which they ought to stand. Spain, by the nature of her revolution, and by the circumstances with which it has been attended has excited the apprehensions of several great powers. England participated in these apprehensions; for even in the year 1820, she foresaw cases, in which it would be impossible to preserve with Spain, relations of peace and good understanding.
France is more interested than any other power in the events which may result from the actual situation of that monarchy. But it is not her own interests alone which are compromised, and which she must keep in view in the present circumstances:—the repose of Europe, and the maintenance of those principles by which it is guaranteed, are involved.
The duke of Wellington knows that these are the sentiments which dictated the conduct of France at Verona; and that the courts which agreed in them regarded the consequences of the revolution, and of the actual state of Spain as being common to them all; that they never entertained the idea that it was between France and Spain alone that the existing difficulties needed to be arranged; that they considered the question to be "wholly European;" and that it is in consequence of this opinion, that the measures which had for their object the bringing about, if possible, an amelioration in the state of a country so highly interesting to Europe, were conceived and proposed—measures, the success of which would have been completely secured, if England had thought she could concur in them.
His most Christian majesty, who was bound to weigh these considerations maturely, has therefore thought that he could not accept the mediation that his Britannic majesty has been pleased to propose to him. He sees, however, with pleasure in this proposition, a new pledge of the conciliatory disposition of the English government; and he thinks that with such feel-
917
His majesty would learn, with the liveliest satisfaction, the success of such efforts. He would see in it a firm ground to hope for the preservation of a peace, of the great value of which, the governments and the people of Europe cannot but be deeply sensible. The undersigned eagerly embraces the opportunity of renewing to his excellency the duke of Wellington the assurances of his high consideration. The undersigned, &c.
(Signed) MONTMORENCY.
No. 12.—Mr. Secretary Canning to the Vicomte de Marcellus.
Foreign Office, January
The undersigned, his majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, has received from the duke of Wellington, late his majesty's plenipotentiary at the Congress of Verona, and has laid before the king his master, the answer of the minister for foreign affairs of his most Christian majesty, to the official note in which the duke of Wellington, on his return from Verona, tendered to the French government the mediation of the king, for the adjustment of differences between France and Spain.
The undersigned is commanded to address to M. de Marcellus, chargé d'affaires of his most Christian majesty, the following observations on the note of his excellency the duke de Montmorency, to be transmitted by M. de Marcellus to his court.
The king has seen with pleasure, that his most Christian majesty does justice to the sentiments which dictated the offer of his majesty's mediation: and although the view which is taken in M. de Montmorency's note, of the nature of the differences between the French and Spanish governments, has induced his most Christian majesty to decline that mediation, the king will not the less anxiously employ, in every way that is yet open to him, those "conciliatory dispositions" for which his most Christian majesty gives him credit, to bring about a state of things less menacing to the peace of Europe, than that which is exhibited in the present position of those two governments towards each other.
The British cabinet had not to learn how fearfully the tranquillity of all Europe must be affected by the hostile collision of France and Spain. Accordingly, in the duke of Wellington's official note, the "adjustment" of the supposed "differences between the French and Spanish governments," was stated as auxiliary to "the preservation of the peace of the world." But the British cabinet certainly did not understand the questions brought forward at Verona, by the plenipotentiary of his most Christian majesty, with respect to the
918
The plenipotentiary of the king of France Solicited from his most Christian majesty's allies a declaration:
1st. Whether, if France should find herself obliged to recall her minister from Madrid, and to break off all diplomatic relations with Spain, they would be disposed to take the like measure, and to recall their several legations?
2nd. If war should break out between France and Spain, in what form, and by what acts, would they afford to France that moral support, which would give to her proceedings the whole force of the alliance, and would inspire a salutary fear into the revolutionists of all countries?
3rd. What were the intentions of the several powers, both as to the substance and the form of the direct assistance which they would be disposed to give to France, in a casein which, upon her demand, their active intervention should become necessary?
France, therefore, originated the discussions upon Spanish affairs at Verona; and the answers of the three continental members of the alliance were addressed to the cases supposed, and to the support demanded, by France.
In common with the three continental powers, the plenipotentiary of his majesty considered the question of peace or war with Spain, as a question peculiarly French, In his answer (given in simultaneously with those of the three continental powers) to the queries of the French plenipotentiary, and in all the discussions which followed thereupon, the duke of Wellington uniformly alleged, as one of his reasons for not assenting to the propositions of M. de Montmorency, the ignorance of the British government as to the antecedent Transactions and communications (during the last-two years) between the governments of France and Spain.
No objection was stated by the duke of Wellington, on the part of the king his master, to the precautionary measures of France, within her own frontier; measures which the right of self-defence plainly authorized, not only against the danger of contagious disease (in which they professedly originated, and to which, till the month of September, they were exclusively ascribed), but against those inconveniences which might possibly arise to France from civil contest in a country separated from France only by a conventional line of demarcation; against the moral infection of political intrigue, and against the violation of French territory by occasional military incursions. But it appeared to his majesty's plenipotentiary at Verona to be necessary and just, that, before he was called upon to promise eventually the support of his government to measures on the part of France which were likely
919
It was therefore impossible for his majesty's plenipotentiary to "concur" in the decisions of Verona.
It remains for the undersigned to advert to that part of the French official note, which appears to insinuate a reproach against this country, as if she had abandoned at Verona, opinions which she had formerly declared with respect to the affairs of Spain.
"England," it is said, "partook in 1820, of the inquietude which the revolution in Spain occasioned to many great powers; she foresaw cases in which it might be impossible to preserve with Spain the relations of good intelligence and peace."
The undersigned must be permitted to say, that though questions were indeed propounded to England in the year 1820, as to possible future contingencies in the affairs of Spain, so far from "foreseeing cases," and deciding upon the conduct which would be applicable to them, in the manner here described, the British government positively declined to bind itself, by a contingent opinion, to any conditional Course of action.
But there was no indisposition or hesitation to avow the principles upon which the opinion of England would be formed, and her course of action regulated. It was not only declared that the British government disclaimed any general right of interference in the internal concerns of independent nations; but it was specifically stated, that there was perhaps no country of equal magnitude with Spain whose internal disturbances would be so little likely to menace other states with that direct and imminent danger, which could alone, in exception to the general rule, justify foreign interference.
The application of these principles to the cases brought forward by France at Verona, was as direct as it was consistent with the former professions of the British cabinet.—That application was further enforced by other considerations, which, though they had not perhaps been distinctly anticipated in a prospective and hypothetical argument bore nevertheless with undeniable force upon the question to be decided at Verona.
Dangers not necessarily arising from the existence of the internal agitations of Spain, might nevertheless be created by an uncalled for and injudicious interposition in them. The spirit of revolution, which, shut up within the Pyrennees, might exhaust itself in struggles, trying indeed to Spain, but harmless to her neighbours, it called forth from within those precincts by the provocation of foreign attack, might find perhaps in other countries fresh aliment for its fury; and might renew throughout Europe, the miseries of the five and twenty years which preceded the peace of 1815.
920
For these and abundant other reasons, the voice of his majesty's plenipotentiary at Verona was for peace. The preservation of general peace is the earnest wish and object of his majesty; and the undersigned is commanded to repeat, that no means will be left unexhausted by his majesty's government, which the impartial employment of good offices can afford, to soothe the irritation at present unhappily subsisting between the governments of France and Spain, and to prevent, if possible, the commencement of hostilities, the consequences of which no human foresight can calculate. The undersigned, &c.
(Signed) GEORGE CANNING.
No. 13.—(Translation).—The Viscount de Chateaubriand to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received, Jan. 27th.
Paris, Jan.
The undersigned minister for foreign affairs, of his most Christian majesty, has laid before the king, the note, dated the 10th of this month which his excellency, the principal secretary of state for foreign affairs of his Britannic majesty, has addressed to viscount Marcellus. He has been commanded to make the following communication to his excellency:
The cabinet of his Britannic majesty would fall into a serious error, if it imagined that France had represented to the congress of Verona, the question of Spain, as having for her an interest entirely separate from that of the allied powers; that, consequently she is inconsistent when, in her answer to the proposition of mediation made by England, she maintains that that question is "wholly European."
France, since the transactions of Aix-la-Chapelle, is closely united with the courts, who, by their efforts, have re-established peace upon the continent. Deeply impressed with the sacred obligation of treaties, she will fulfil the duties which they impose upon her:—one of the duties thus required of France was, to make known to her allies, the motives which had compelled her to establish an army of observation on one of her frontiers, and to explain her uneasiness on approaching events, of which it was easy to calculate the chances. In the position in which the agitations in Spain had placed her, common prudence required that she should make herself acquainted with the part which the allied powers would take, in the event of war becoming inevitable.
This line of conduct, which good sense and reason pointed cut, the duke de Montmorency was bound to follow at Verona. The sovereigns were of opinion (in which the French government concluded,) that there was imminent danger to society, in that military anarchy in Spain, in which those principles were put forth anew, which, during thirty years, had occasioned the misfortunes of Europe. From these general conferences, particular questions naturally arose; and cases which were originally involved in the general interests, became the subject of specific discussion.
921
The result of these frank communications was, that France found herself placed in a position to act separately in a cause which was, as it were, appropriated to her, without, however, separating her policy from that of her allies; so that, according to the impression which the case conveyed, it might be said, without fear of contradiction, that the question respecting Spain was at once "wholly French, and wholly European."
The undersigned, flattering himself that he has given a satisfactory answer to the first objection of his Britannic majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, proceeds to the consideration of another point.
The cabinet of the Tuilleries have not forgotten, that the principal motive alleged by his grace the duke of Wellington at Verona, for not explaining himself upon the
casus fœderis,
The minister for foreign affairs of his Britannic majesty, in reply to an observation contained in the note of M. le Due de Montmorency, dated the 24th December, states that the cabinet of St. James's has never admitted that there was a case to justify intervention in the affairs of Spain; and that therefore it might refuse to bind itself for the future by expressing an opinion upon contingent and uncertain events. The undersigned thinks, however, that he has reasons for not doubting that in a
Mémoire
The undersigned regrets that he cannot coincide in opinion with his Britannic majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, as to the little danger to which the Spanish revolution exposes the other powers of Europe. The state of modern civilization brings one nation into communication with all others, however completely it may be insulated by geographical position. France, especially, the only country whose frontier touches that of Spain, suffers considerably from the troubles
922
That France, disquieted in her interior, and armed on her frontiers for her defence, should be under an imperious necessity to escape from a position so painful to her, is what it is impossible not to acknowledge. Like the British government, she sincerely desires peace. She would not have hesitated in concert with her allies, to accept the mediation of England, if the discussion of specific interest were in question; but it is impossible to establish a basis of negotiation upon political theories, and of arbitration upon principles.
For the same reason France could not accede to the proposal which M. de San Miguel made on the 12th of this month, to the minister of Great Britain at the court of Madrid, in order to engage that power to interfere in the affairs of the French and Spanish governments—an intervention useless, at the least, since it appears
923
If the cabinet of Madrid is sincere in its communications, does it need an intermediate channel to transmit them to the cabinet of the Tuilleries? The latter does not fear to explain itself. Even recently it has made known the reasonable conditions, by means of which a speedy reconciliation might be effected.
The Comte de la Garde has received orders to communicate confidentially to sir William A'Court the king's benevolent intentions. His most Christian majesty demands, that his Catholic majesty, should, of himself, and by his own authority, apply the necessary modifications to the institutions which have been imposed on the crown of Spain by the revolt of a few soldiers.
To this free concession by king Ferdinand, of the corrected institutions, the king of France thinks that it would be proper to add, a full and complete amnesty, for all political acts committed from 1822, up to the day of promulgating the royal concession.—Thus would disappear from the Spanish constitution, the defects, in substance, and in form, which endanger all legitimate monarchies. The undersigned feels persuaded, that propositions so just and so moderate will obtain the concurrence of all the cabinets of Europe.
The French government having made every sort of sacrifice to the desire of avoiding war; having struggled, perhaps too long, against public opinion, roused by the provocations of Spain—has at length reached that last limit of concession which no power, that respects itself, can with impunity over-step. Injured in her essential interests France, without ceasing to offer the most ardent prayers for peace, can no longer shut her eyes to the dangers which threaten her. She has already taken, and she will continue to take, the measures best calculated for putting an end to a state of uncertainty, which compromises alike her safety, her honour, and her dignity. Whatever may be the event, France will always have pleasure in relying on the good offices of which the English government has again been pleased to renew to her the proposal. She will herself use her utmost endeavour to draw closer the ties which so happily unite the two monarchies and the two people.
(Signed) CHATEAUBRIAND.
No. 14.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir Charles Stuart.
Foreign Office, January
Sir;—Shortly after I had despatched the messenger yesterday, M. de Marcellus delivered to me the official answer of M. de Chateaubriand to the note addressed by me to M. de Marcellus on the 10th instant.
As it appears from your excellency's despatch of the 24th, which also reached me yesterday that M. de Chateaubriand, though he stated to your excellency the substance of this note, had not furnished you with a copy of
924
Upon a first consideration I am by no means sure that it will be necessary to reply officially to this note of M. de Chateaubriand; since it in effect admits all the material propositions of the note to which it is an answer.
The questions brought forward by France at Verona are acknowledged to have been French questions, in the sense in which they are in my note described to have been such; that is to say, the interest of France is stated in those questions not as distinct from the interest of Europe, but as more immediate:—and it is not denied, that the refusal of his majesty's plenipotentiary to concur in the decisions of Verona, was founded on the omission by France to substantiate any specific ground of complaint against the Spanish government.
In the subsequent part of M. de Chateaubriand's note, while the assertion of my note of the 10th instant, that Great Britain had in 1820 declined anticipating hypothetical cases in which it might be impossible to remain at peace with Spain, is disputed; the only two cases which are cited in exception to that assertion, are cases wholly independent of the principle of interference in the internal concerns of other nations.
It is averred, that we admitted the necessity of war against Spain; first, if Spain herself should be guilty of aggression against other states, and secondly and specifically, if she should attempt to possess herself of Portugal.
Unquestionably, with respect to either of those cases, Great Britain would admit, not only prospectively and hypothetically, and as to Spain, but positively and directly as to any power whatever, that aggression against any of its neighbours would justify war; and that aggression against Portugal would impose upon Great Britain the duty of protecting her ally.
But these admissions leave the question as to the right of interference in the affairs of Spain, where it was.
With respect to that part of M. de Chateaubriand's note which describes the nature of the demands intended to be made by France upon Spain, and takes credit for the moderation of them; your excellency will not fail to observe, that our difference with France and the allies throughout, is not as to the arrangements which it might be desirable to obtain from Spain, but as to the principle upon which France and the allies propose to require them.
We disclaim for ourselves, and deny for other powers, the right of requiring any changes in the internal institutions of independent states, with the menace of hostile attack in case of refusal. The moderation of such demands in no degree justifies in our eyes such a mode of enforcing them; and this distinction it is the more important to keep steadily in view, and to impress upon the French government, at a moment when, for their sake, and at their desire, we are suggesting to Spain, in
925
Your excellency will speak in this sense to M. de Chateaubriand, when you acknowledge on my part the receipt of his official note; from the general tone of which, and from the friendliness of its expressions towards this country, you will inform M. de Chateaubriand, that his majesty's government derives the liveliest satisfaction; at the same time that it views with deep regret the tendency of that part of the note which appears to indicate an expectation of hostilities with Spain. I am, &c.
(Signed) GEORGE CANNING.
CLASS B.—PARIS AND MADRID.
No. 1.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir William A'Court.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office
In order that you may be fully informed of the manner in which the question of interference in the affairs of Spain has been treated at the conferences at Verona, I have directed copies of the principal communications received from the duke of 'Wellington on that question, to be prepared for you; and I herewith transmit them to you for your information.
No. 2.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir William A'Court.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office,
On the day after I had despatched my last messenger to you, M. de Colomb, the Spanish chargé d'affaires, requested a conference; at which he first read, and then delivered to me, the extract of a despatch from his court, of which I inclose a copy.
*
No. 3 —Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir William A'Court.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office,
I have received this morning, the duke of Wellington's final despatches from Verona. No argument will be left unemployed on the part of his majesty, which may tend to allay a warlike disposition in his most Christian majesty's councils. His majesty's mediation between France and Spain, if solicited by Spain and accepted by France, would be gladly given and earnestly exerted, to settle the disputes between those powers, and to preserve the peace of the world.
If Spain be disposed to solicit that mediation, she will entitle herself to it, first, by redressing our grievances—and secondly, by a confidential and spontaneous assurance, that his Catholic majesty and his family are altogether safe from violence.
Upon this latter point, it is not intended that you should make any direct demand to the Spanish government. It could not pro-
*
926
No. 4.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir William A'Court.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office,
I transmit to you an extract
*
No. 5.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir William A'Court.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office,
I re-despatch your messenger with the inclosed copy of an official note† presented to the French government by the duke of Wellington the day before his departure from Paris. You will communicate it to M. de San Miguel; and if desired, will furnish him with a copy of it.
No. G.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir William A'Court.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office,
Sir Charles Stuart has transmitted the answer of the French government to the official note presented by the duke of Wellington, at Paris. In that answer (of which I inclose a copy‡), the French government, while it declines accepting the proffered mediation of his majesty, on the ground that there is no specific point of difference, to the removal or explanation of which mediation can be distinctly applied, expresses nevertheless the pleasure with which it views the "conciliatory dispositions" of the British government, and the hope which it derives from those dispositions, of the continuance of peace in Europe.
Sir C. Stuart at the same time, reports to me, the instructions which have been transmitted by the French government to their ministers at Madrid.§ M. de Marcellus has been with me this morning for the purpose of making, by order of his government, a similar communication.
As the object at Verona was to induce us to make common cause with all; so the object of France, since she has to a certain degree reconsidered for herself the measures framed at Verona, appears to be to induce us to concur in her separate and mitigated measure.
*
† See inclosure No. 10, Verona and Paris papers.
‡ See No. 12, in Verona and Paris papers.
§ Despatch from M. de Villèle to M. Lagarde, dated Paris, December 25, 1822.
927
The truth is, as you are aware, that our objection to joining in the measures settled at Verona was an objection of principle not of degree; an objection not capable therefore of being overcome by a were modification of the execution of them.
It would have been idle to offer our mediation to France, if we had been prepared to unite with her in the conditional menace contained in the despatch which she has now addressed to her minister at Madrid—a menace softened perhaps in it's terms, and less precise as to the conditions on which it depends than those of the other continental powers, but still vicious in principle, as at once demanding of Spain something to be done in the arrangement of her internal concerns, and denouncing (in however comparatively distant and obscure a manner) war as the consequence of refusal.
In speaking to M. de San Miguel upon the subject of those instructions, you will disclaim or your government any participation in this proceeding of the French government. But you will avow the deep interest which the king, our master, feels in the agitations now prevailing in Spain; his majesty's anxious hope that the Spanish government and nation may avoid any access, either in action or in language; and his majesty's unabated desire, to employ his good offices, in whatever way may be most useful to Spain, for averting the dangers with which she is threatened, and for reconciling her to France and to all Europe.
No. 7—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir William A'Court.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office,
It may be of so much use to you, in the present critical state of things, to have with you some person, in the duke of Wellington's entire confidence, and capable of communicating in his grace's name with individuals whom he has personally known, and who are now in the Spanish government or councils, that lord Fitzroy Somerset has agreed to undertake a journey to Madrid, for the purpose of affording, you such assistance. He will set off in the course of next week, and will remain at Madrid as long as you think he can be useful to you.
No. 8.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received January 2, 1823.
(Extract.)
Madrid, Dec.
Mr. Jackson is arrived, and has delivered to me your despatches of the 9th ultimo. I am now really inclined to believe that we shall come to an amicable and satisfactory termination of our discussions with the Spanish government.
My conversation with M. San Miguel this morning began by his pulling from his pocket a large roll of papers, with which, he said, he was going down immediately to the Cortes, with the view of requesting authority from that body, to settle every question at issue between England and Spain.
928
"We are sure of England," he said, "and satisfied with her position; and, we hope that the Cortes will enable us to make her satisfied with Spain. We cannot expect her to range herself on our side, nor to send troops or fleets to assist us; but we are persuaded that she will never assist our enemies, nor furnish them with the means of invading us. It is moreover so much her interest to prevent war breaking out between us and France, that it is quite unnecessary to ask for her mediation—There is certainly nothing to induce us to ask for such a mediation at present; but we are at sea, surrounded by dangers, and menaced by storms, and it is impossible to say that we may not yet require a friendly hand. But we see nothing yet to make it necessary for us to ask any mediation, nor have we at present any intention to solicit one."
I have thought it adviseable, sir, to repeat to you this conversation, that you may be able to draw from it your own conclusion as to the probability of our mediation being solicited. I am myself of opinion that such a step will never be resorted to, till every other hope has failed: and certainly there is nothing in the despatches from Paris, nor in the conversations or conduct of general Lagarde, to make this government despair of avoiding a war without our mediation.
No. 9.— Mr. Secretary Canning to Lord Fitzroy Somerset.
Foreign Office,
My Lord;—in returning to your lordship the memorandum which the duke of Wellington has put into your hands, of the points upon which it may he advantageous to the king's service, that your lordship should communicate verbally his grace's sentiments to such of the persons now taking a leading part in the affairs of Spain, as may be likely to be influenced by a communication of this confidential nature, I have very little to add to the contents of the memorandum; and that little relates rather to the mode of your acting upon it, than to the substance of the paper itself.
Important as the aid which your lordship will bring to sir William A'Court must be, you will, I am sure, be aware of the absolute necessity of not appearing to be invested with any separate mission, which might detract in the eyes of the Spanish ministers from that gentleman's official or personal authority.
Your lordship will be so good as to consult sir William A'Court's wishes and opinions as to the occasions on which, and as to the persons with whom, you should enter upon the topics entrusted to your discretion; and you will report to him your several conversation not disguising from the individuals with whom those conversations are held, that you are to do so.
At the same bane, however, that you will be thus careful to mark your relation to his majesty's established minister, it will be essential to avoid creating the impression, that the sug-
929
What is necessary to enable us to mediate for Spain with honour, is the redress of the grievances which we have against her. But that matter is in sir William A'Court's hands; and is, I hope in a train of settlement.
With regard to the length of your stay at Madrid, I have only to refer you to your own and sir William A'Court's joint discretion.
I shall hope to hear from your lordship soon after your arrival, and as often as there is a safe opportunity of writing. I have the honour to be, &c.
(Signed) GEORGE CANNING.
(Inclosure in No. 9.)—Memorandum by the Duke of Wellington for Lord Fitzroy Somerset.
London, January
It is important to make the Spaniards feel, that a king being necessary for the government of their country, and a part of their system, as established by themselves—it follows, as a matter of equal necessity, that the powers and prerogatives assigned to the king in the system, should be such as to enable him to perform his duties, and such as, in reason, a king ought to be satisfied with.
If the situation of the king is not what it ought to be—if he has not the power to protect himself, and those employed under him, in the performance of their duty in the service of the public: and if the king has not reason to be satisfied, that the power allotted to him by the law is sufficient—the country will never be in a state of tranquillity, be the system of government what it may.
There will be perpetual, successive, royalist insurrections in one part of the country or the other; and the king and his government will be objects of never-ceasing jealousy and distrust.
The family connection between his Catholic majesty and the king of France—and the interest which the latter naturally feels for the welfare of the former—will occasion a perpetual irritation between the two countries, so long as the situation of the king in Spain is not what it ought to be: which it may be expected will, sooner or later, occasion war, and the invasion of the weaker country.
Thus then, those Spaniards who really desire the peace and welfare of their country, must look to an alteration of their constitution, which shall have for its object, to give the king the power of executing his office. I confess that I do not see any objection to this alteration,
930
This will be the case particularly, if the proposed alterations of the system are concerted with the king. Indeed, no other Mode of making those alterations can have the desired effect as, if they are not made in concert with the king, his Catholic majesty will not cordially carry into execution the system proposed; and, both king and people being dissatisfied, there will still be the same causes for internal disturbance and for external war as exist at present. The concert with the king on the alterations must be a real one and the king must be satisfied, that the consitution, as altered, will secure the foundations of his power over the executive government, and will give him the means of protecting himself, his family, and his servants.
Neither do I see any reason for deferring to make these alterations in the recent transactions of foreign powers. Those transactions are all professedly defensive. France professes, by her Army of Observation, to be defensive; and declares that she will not pass the frontier, excepting on the occurrence of certain cases. The alterations of the constitution, on the principles proposed, would render those cases so improbable, as that the continuance of the Army of Observation would be an useless expense; and there is no doubt that it would be immediately withdrawn.
Then, another advantage which would result from this alteration in aid of internal tranquillity is, that France would most probably immediately adopt some efficient measure to prevent the assembly of the royalists within the French frontier. All Spaniards who pass the frontier, might be ordered to reside at such a distance from the frontier, as to render their intrigues or their operations within the Spanish frontier nearly impossible; and thus the asylum given in France to persons of this description, would not be inconsistent with the peace and tranquillity of Spain.
But this is not all. The Spaniards must see that all the sources of the prosperity of their country are nearly destroyed; and that the very foundations of social order and government are in a state of risk. There is no trade, no private or public revenue: the national property cannot be sold: the interest of the national debt cannot be paid; nor can the army, or any of the public servants or establishments; and no money can be borrowed.
931
I happen to know that the principal monied people in Europe, will not lend their money to Spain, till they shall see a system prevail in that country, which shall afford some hope of the re-establishment and permanence of peace and good order.
If all this be true—if it be true, besides, that the best chance that Spain has of coming to some arrangement with her colonies, is to be found in some settlement of her internal dissensions and distractions, it is impossible that any reasonable Spaniard can doubt that the time is come, to effect those alterations, which the common sense of mankind points out to be necessary.
No. 10.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir W. A'Court.
Foreign Office, January
Sir;—This dispatch will be delivered to you by lord Fitzroy Somerset, who has the goodness to undertake a journey to Madrid (without any official character), in the hope of being useful to you in the very difficult and complicated state of your present negotiations, through his acquaintance with some of the prominent characters, among military and other public men, in Spain; and through the knowledge which he possesses, and is known to possess, of the views and opinions of the duke of Wellington.
There may be those among the leaders of the Cortes, or in offices of the executive government, who would listen to friendly counsels, coming from a man to whom Spain is so deeply indebted as the duke of Wellington, and to whom her welfare is naturally so Wellington, from the very services which he has had the glory of rendering to her, though they might turn a deaf ear to any other suggestions.
The object of England is, to preserve the peace, of which her exertions have prevented the immediate interruption. But it is much to be feared that peace cannot be preserved, if things remain in their present state, both at Madrid and on the frontier of Spain.
France can hardly be expected to withdraw her Army of Observation, without some assurances from Spain, which she may plead as satisfactory. We ask no such assurances for ourselves, and we annex no penalty to the refusing or withholding them: but it would enable us to do much, that such assurances should voluntarily be given to us; and perhaps they may be given less reluctantly through the confidential friend of the duke of Wellington, than directly to yourself, even if you were authorized officially to receive them. The interval is precious, and it is hoped that it may not be thrown away.
I inclose to you a copy of a letter
*
You will see that he is to consult your judg-
*
932
(Signed) GEORGE CANNING.
No. 11.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir William A'Court.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office, Jan.
Inclosed is a copy of an official note
*
Our position between France and Spain is strictly mediatorial, even though neither of the two states should (for different reasons) think fit to avail itself of our formal mediation: and though we are not invested with the office, we must endeavour practically to perform the duties of it.
I have received the king's commands to signify to you his majesty's gracious approbation of the ability, zeal, and perseverance with which you have executed the instructions heretofore confided to you, with respect to the commercial and maritime claims of his majesty's subjects—the settlement of which after so long a course of complaint and remonstrance, will be mainly to be attributed to your exertions.
The difficulty of the task imposed upon you by the tenor of those instructions, contrasted as they are with the more acceptable communications which you have subsequently had to make to the Spanish government, is fully acknowledged; and your success in reconciling two apparently opposite courses of conduct, and producing (as it is hoped you may do) a favourable result in both, will be proportionably appreciated by your government.
If any thing of personal indisposition towards yourself, shall appear to have been excited in the mind of those with whom you have had to negociate, from the pertinacity with which you have been directed to press the unpleasant topics of your late conferences, you will not scruple to set yourself right, by throwing the whole responsibility upon your instructions.
It would have been very desirable if indeed, if it had been proper, to qualify the unpleasantness of those instructions, by accompanying them with some distinct intimation of the part which the plenipotentiary of his majesty was taking in Spanish affairs at Verona: but such an intimation of our separate opinion could not be given, in fairness to the allies, while
*
933
Now that the whole of our conduct is before the Spanish government, you will assuredly find no difficulty in convincing them of the correctness of both parts of it; in showing them that a determination to vindicate our rights against Spain was not incompatible with a respect for her national independence; and in availing yourself of the removal of that dissatisfaction, which must always have tinged our intercourse with the Spanish government, while our just grievances remained unredressed, to impress upon M. de San Miguel our desire to prove, by our good offices in Europe, how little any feeling of hostility entered into the measures to which we were compelled to resort for the defence of our honour and our interests in America.
(Extract.) No. 12.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received Jan. 9, 1823.
Madrid, December
I saw M. de San Miguel again this morning, who continued to speak in the same friendly tone as during our last conference, and repeated his assurances that every thing respecting our claims should be arranged to our entire satisfaction, provided the Cortes granted him the faculties he demanded.—This I trust will be done.
In the course of this conference M. de San Miguel said, that he fully understood our position, and our friendly intentions towards Spain; which arose indeed from a conviction of our own interests. It never could tally with English policy that France should be in military occupation of Spain.
He then added, that, from every report which had lately reached him, he did not believe that any war was likely to take place. The Congress was over, and the great continental sovereigns had retired to their respective states, leaving every thing to France: and he had reason to believe that France was by no means in those decidedly hostile intentions, which there had once been reason to apprehend.
With respect to the possibility of any future solicitation of British mediation, he gave me to understand that it was a question of so delicate a nature, and necessarily so dependent upon contingencies, that he wished, at present, to say nothing upon the subject. If ever such a solicitation took place, it would bed one in the most open, frank, and unreserved manner, by an official written document, which should leave no doubt upon the mind of one party, as to the intentions of the other.
I shall draw no inferences from this conversation, nor argue upon the probability or non-probability of our mediation being solicited; as you, sir, will be much better able to judge correctly of this matter, from the communications you receive of what is passing in the
934
No. 13.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir William A'Court.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office, Jan.
I was about to send this messenger to you the day before yesterday, with my despatch of that date, when yours by the Spanish messenger arrived.
Its contents, though not conclusive, are highly interesting; and if the hopes which you hold out, with respect to the settlement of our claims, are realised, you will have rendered a great service to your country.
You have judged quite correctly in not pressing the mediation of his majesty. The refusal of the French government puts any formal exercise of it now out of the question. But, substantially, our, good offices may do all that the most regularly accepted mediation could have done.
The position in which the Spanish and French governments stand towards each other cannot last. Every day brings with it the hazard of an accidental infraction of peace on the frontiers; and the smallest such infraction might confound all our hopes and endeavours. Till France shall withdraw her Army of Observation, there is no security against such hazards. France cannot withdraw her army (it is fair to admit) without some cause to assign for doing so. The only cause to be assigned must be some satisfactory assurances received from Spain. Spain may be reluctant to give such assurances to France, under the apparent influence of a menace. But she may confide them to us, who neither require them, nor threaten any consequence of withholding them. If Spain has griefs against France, she may, in like manner, confide to us the statement of them, as an inducement to France to be satisfied with less concession.
Such is the summary of the present state of things, on which depends the fearful alternative of peace or war. We earnestly desire the former; not only for our own interest, as M. San Miguel suggests, but for the larger interests of Europe (those of Spain herself included), in which ultimately, if not immediately, our own no doubt may be involved.
We wish for peace, therefore, in Europe: but peace for ourselves we are determined, at all events, to preserve; and should our efforts to maintain it between France and Spain prove abortive, we shall have the consolation to have discharged the duty towards both, of a faithful and disinterested ally; and shall retire thenceforth within the limits of a strict neutrality.
This last topic you cannot state too clearly, nor press too strongly upon M. San Miguel; as there are not wanting those who may wish to inspire him with the notion that the anxiety which we manifest to rescue Spain from the war, is an earnest of a determination to join
935
No. 14—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received Jan. 20
Madrid, Jan.
Sir;—Long before this despatch can reach you, the final determination of the cabinets of Austria, Russia, and Prussia, as well as that of the cabinet of the Tuilleries, will have left little doubt on your mind as to the probable issue of the negotiations (if negotiations they may be called) undertaken with the government here.
It is therefore unnecessary for me to do more than give a succinct statement of events in this capital, from the period of their arrival to the moment of writing this despatch.
The French minister, as might have been foreseen, had the start of his colleagues, having received his letters two or three days earlier than they received theirs. He made use of this time to give that favourable impression of the intentions of his government, to which his attention appears to have been directed by his instructions; and he had already prepared the Spanish government thoroughly to understand the position in which France had placed herself, long before any intimation could be given, by the representatives of the other continental powers, of the intentions of their respective courts.
The Spanish government, thus set comparatively at ease with respect to France, and sure of the neutrality of England, could not be expected to pay any very great attention to the vague suggestions of three distant powers, couched in language very far from conciliatory. Instead then of any intimidation being exhibited, or any point being yielded, the tone adopted by the Spanish government has been that of conscious security. No written answer to the several communications has indeed been given; but it has been promised: and there is every reason to suppose that, when it arrives, it will be found to be in the sense which this feeling would naturally dictate; and that the departure of the Austrian, Russian, and Prussian representatives must necessarily follow. The French minister will remain.
I must do the Spanish government the justice to say, that, so far as I can perceive, it has not assumed any improper manner, or exhibited any extraordinary presumption upon the present occasion. M. de San Miguel, indeed, in his conversations with me, since the arrival of the despatches above-mentioned, has spoken in a tone of much greater moderation, and has held out much greater hopes for the future, than he ever ventured to express before:—he more than insinuated, that modifications might be effected, whenever the country should be relieved from the danger of foreign interference.
936
The contents of the communications made have not yet been sufficiently digested by the public, to allow me to speak with any certainty of the general feeling. Upon the whole, how, ever, I do not observe any very great effervescence; nor do I, as yet, see any reason to fear that any personal insults will be offered to the representatives of the allied sovereigns. The town remains perfectly tranquil I have done, and shall continue to do, every thing in my power to allay the irritation which may exist, and to prevent the adoption of violent measures. The friendly and cordial footing upon which M. San Miguel and I now stand, makes me hope that my endeavours will not be entirely useless. I have the honour to be, &c.
(Signed) WILLIAM A'COURT.
No. 15.—Sir A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning—Receoved Jan. 20.
Madrid, Jan.
Sir;—The despatches received and communicated to this government, by the representatives of the three continental powers, were yesterday presented and read to the Cortes, by M. de San Miguel, in a public sitting. He at the same time read the answer addressed to the Spanish minister at Paris, but previously communicated to M. Lagarde; and the despatches addressed to the Spanish representatives at the courts of Austria, Russia, and Prussia, in answer to the communications made by the respective chargés d'affaires of those powers residing here.
The answer to the French despatch contains nothing that can be deemed offensive. The answers to the others will probably be considered in that light. I inclose a gazette containing all those documents, which the immediate departure of the courier will prevent me from getting translated.
The Cortes exhibited a great degree of temper and moderation. M. M. Arguelles and Galiano immediately moved that no discussion should be entered into for the moment, but the whole he referred to the foreign committee; alleging, that a certain time should be given for passion to subside—it being highly desirable that the members should come to the discussion of so grave a subject, with the temper and decorum becoming the Spanish character and nation. The papers were consequently referred to the committee for foreign affairs, to report upon the same; and the committee was also instructed to prepare an address, to be presented by the Cortes to the king, pledging the nation to reject all compromise with foreign powers, unbecoming the dignity of their country; and expressing their determination to die, if necessary, in defence of the constitutional throne. The committee was ordered to report in forty-eight hours.
As it was not very generally known that these documents were to be publicly read, the House was by no means full. The galleries were disposed to be a little riotous, venting their constitutional ardor in repeated cheers, and a
937
I cannot help, thinking, that some of the moderation exhibited may be due to the language which I have uniformly held, as Well to M. de San Miguel, as to others who have considerable influence. I certainly prevailed in preventing passports from being sent, unasked, to the three chargès d'affaires, as was at first intended. This is perhaps not gaining much, as they will be immediately applied for by them; but still it prevents what might hereafter be construed into, a fresh ground of offence, on the part of this government.
Not to leave any measures untried for the preservation of peace, I have also opened myself in the most unreserved manner to the French minister, offering to co-operate with him by every means in my power for that first of objects. Till within these few days, he appeared to be as anxious as myself to prevent things from coming to extremities; but since the arrival of the last courier from Paris, I have observed a difference in his tone, which I cannot but attribute to fresh instructions. He informed me yesterday that it would be impossible for him after the departure of his three colleagues, to allow the slightest offence or insolence to pass without immediately demanding his passports. The persuasion upon his mind now seems to be that a war is inevitable.
If the French government be determined on war, it will certainly be impossible for us to prevent it from taking place: yet I have very strong reason to believe, that I shall receive from the Spanish government, within forty-eight hours, an application for our good offices (though I fear not for our mediation); and I cannot but hope, that if this be the case, it will give a fresh aspect to affairs. If such an application reach me, I shall request Mr. Jackson to set off with it immediately for London: but I cannot assure you positively that it will be made, till I hold the application in my hands. I have the honour to be, &c.
(Signed) WILLIAM A'COURT.
16.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received Jan. 21.
Madrid, Jan.
Sir;—In my despatch of the 10th instant, I stated to you that I had reason to believe that a note would shortly be addressed to me, requesting the good offices of England, with the view to prevent the breaking out of a war between this country and France.
This note has reached me, and I have the honour to inclose a copy of it herewith. I have requested Mr. Jackson to proceed with it directly to England; and have selected him the rather, from the persuasion that no one is better qualified to give you verbally those further explanations, which, under the present circumstances; I can hardly venture to write.
938
If France be pacifically inclined, something may yet grow out of this overture to prevent that recurrence to arms, the consequences of which it is impossible to foresee. France may state what she wants to Great Britain; who may thus become the medium of her communications with this government, in the event of the departure of her minister. This appears to me, at all events, to be the last hope that remains for the preservation of peace; and therefore, faint as it is, it should not be rejected. I have the honour to be, &c.
(Signed) WILLIAM A'COURT.
(Translation of Inclosure in No. 16.)—Mr. de San Miguel to Sir William A'Court.
Madrid, January
Sir;—Under date of the 9th inst. an official copy of the late communications which the representatives of France, Austria, Prussia and Russia at this court, have made to the Spanish government, by order of their respective courts, together with the answers given to them, was forwarded to Mr. Jabat, his majesty's minister plenipotentiary in London. At the same time orders were given to the aforesaid minister, to read the whole of this correspondence to his Britannic majesty's secretary of state for foreign affairs, and to declare to him, that the principles and resolutions of the Spanish government would never differ from those consigned in these documents.
His Catholic majesty's government will, consequently, have but little to add in the note which I have now the honour to address to you, by royal order, together with the inclosed gazette; which contains an official and authentic copy of the communications in question, which are not forwarded to you for want of time.
You, sir, who have been an eye-witness of the events which have occurred in this capital during the last three months, and of the scene which it has presented during the last three days, can inform your government better than any one else, of the firm determination of all Spain to defend her national independence at all hazards, and never to acknowledge a right of intervention on the part of any foreign power. The justice of the cause of the nation is so obvious, and its right to be independent so sacred and imprescriptible, that his, majesty's government would think it an affront to your judgment, sir, to dwell any longer upon this point.
Any defect which the present constitution of Spain may have, ought to be discovered and remedied, freely and spontaneously, by the nation itself. The contrary would ten to establish a right of the most terrible, and insupportable oppression. The Spaniards are, at present, identified with the constitution promulgated in 1812.—They,all behold in their present monarch Don Fernando the 7th, the sacred and inviolable person of their constitutional king; and it cannot be concealed from you, sir, that this respect professed to king,
939
Spain, unvarying in her principles, awaits calmly, the result of the answers which have been given to the communications of the four great continental powers; but she flatters herself, however, that blood will not be shed in Europe, for questions so evident in themselves; and that France will lay aside her system of precaution, as she calls it (
su llamado sistema de precaucion
To England, who has taken in the conferences at Verona so moderate and pacific a line, it now belongs to crown the work; and to prevent an effusion of blood, which can be productive of no possible advantage to the interest of any nation. To England too belongs the task of making the French government perceive the error which it is committing, in taking measures and precautions, which only produce contrary results to those, which it states itself to have in view.
The existence of its Army of Observation on the Pyrennees, and the protection afforded to the insurgents, are entirely incompatible with that tranquillity, which the French government says it wishes Spain to enjoy.
His Catholic majesty's government hopes that this fatal contradiction will at length disappear:—and, in attaining this object, it feels that it can no where look for more effectual assistance, than from the cabinet of Great Britain, the exercise of whose influence to this effect, will not, it trusts, be denied.
I beg, sir, that you will be pleased to lay before your government, the communication which I have now the honour of making to you, and I embrace this opportunity of renewing to you the assurances, &c. &c.
(Signed) EVARISTO SAN MIGUEL.
No. 17.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir Charles Stuart.
Foreign Office, January
Sir;—I enclose to your excellency a copy of a note
*
The object of this note is, as your excellency sees, to obtain the good offices of his majesty's government with France, for the purpose of averting hostilities.
It is needless to repeat to your excellency, how anxiously the king our master deprecates a war between two powers, whose collision must so deeply affect the general tranquillity of Europe; or how confidently his majesty infers from the desire for peace, so repeatedly expressed by his most Christian majesty's government, a disposition on their part to avail themselves of every opening for adjustment and explanation with Spain.
*
940
I have therefore received his majesty's commands to direct you to request an audience of M. de Chateaubriand, so soon as this despatch shall reach you; to read to him M. de San Miguel's note; and to inform him, that Mr. Jackson (who was the bearer of sir William A'Court's last despatches, and by whom this despatch will be delivered to you), will wait at Paris, for the result of the deliberations of his most Christian majesty's cabinet upon M. de San Miguel's note, in order to convey to sir William A'Court your excellency's report of that result.
In your conversation with M. de Chateaubriand, your excellency is not to over-rate the value of the concessions, implied, rather than distinctly expressed, in the note of M. de San Miguel; nor to represent it as completely satisfactory, and as leaving nothing to be desired:—but it is just and reasonable, at the same time, to consider the circumstances under which it was written.
Assuredly the more enlightened part of the government, or of the Cortes, of Spain, does not believe the Spanish constitution of 1812 to be, in all its parts, usefully and permanently practicable. But if there exist imperfections in the frame of the government of France, or of England respectively, should we consent to reform those imperfections, on the demand of a foreign power, and under the menace of a foreign war as the penalty of our refusal?
Even by the mode in which the demand was made by France, that part of the Spanish government or nation, which might be willing to undertake those ameliorations of the present constitution of Spain without which it is alleged to be unsafe to her neighbours, has been placed in a situation of great difficulty. Is it not plain, that the same proposition completely changes its nature, according to the manner in which it is brought forward?—that one, which, if submitted through the regular channels of diplomacy, might he matter of wholesome advice or amicable remonstrance; when addressed to a nation aloud, and in the presence, as it were, of all the world, becomes a taunt and a defiance? The publication of the despatch to M. Lagarde, while it was yet on its road to Madrid, is, I know, defended by the alleged necessity of tranquillizing the public mind at Paris. But if the public mind at Paris required to be tranquillized, was not the public mind at Madrid liable to be inflamed?
Your excellency will not understand these observations to be made with any view of inculpating the proceedings of the French government, with which, abstractedly, we have no concern.
I would recall M. de Chateaubriand's attention to the situation in which the French government has placed itself towards Spain, by the manner in which her first alternative for war has been propounded—only for the purpose of impressing upon the French government the necessity of not omitting any
941
The French government desires to assure itself of the safety of the royal family of Spain, and of a disposition in the leading members of the Cortes, as well as of the government, to turn to advantage any occasion that may occur, or that can be created by a prudent and gradual course of measures, for the remedy of the defects in the Spanish constitution:—a channel is now opened to the French government for endeavouring to arrive at those assurances. A precipitate removal of the royal family from Madrid—would be the instant and infallible consequence of the march of a French army across the frontier. If the amendments in the Spanish constitution are absolutely necessary, and it is hopeless to bring about those amendments otherwise than by arms—has the French government chalked out to itself the course by which a successful invasion is to be made to lead to the desired result? The occupancy of Madrid, as repeated experience shows, is not the dominion of Spain. The king, and the Cortes, will be established elsewhere, and what is then to follow but a continuance of civil and foreign war, spreading misery and devastation over the whole kingdom?
These considerations your excellency will suggest to M. de Chateaubriand, in a tone of perfect amity and good-will; and with the assurance of the most entire persuasion, on the part of his majesty's government, that the prosperity and tranquillity of France are objects in which Great Britain has, herself, the deepest concern. It is seen and acknowledged here, and acknowledged with no feelings but those of congratulation and satisfaction, that every year's continuance of peace to France, must consolidate more and more her political institutions, and promote those improvements in her interior condition and resources, which assure to her the high rank that she holds among European nations. But in proportion as we feel this sentiment sincerely, we deprecate the fearful experiment of a war, in which there is so little to gain by success; and at a hazard which appears to us as imminent as unnecessary.
The immediate object, however, of your interview with M. de Chateaubriand, is to bring before him the overture from M. de San Miguel; to offer his majesty's minister at Madrid as a channel of communication with the Spanish government; and to assure the French government of the anxious desire of his majesty, to promote, in that or in any other way, the attainment of such a settlement with Spain, as France may deem consistent not only with her safety but her honour.
This despatch will be delivered to your excellency, I hope, on Sunday; so that you will have an opportunity of communicating to M. de Chateaubriand the Spanish note, the day before the meeting of the Chambers.
942
I trust the new opening which it affords for discussion and possible accommodation, may be felt as some relief to the French government, under the difficulties of their present position. I am, &c.
(Signed) GEORGE CANNING.
No. 18.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received January 26.
(Extract.)
Madrid, January
Nothing of any material importance has occurred since Mr. Jackson left Madrid. There is a party labouring hard at the present moment to bring about the publication of a general amnesty. I shall do every thing in my power to forward the adoption of this measure, by representing the favourable impression it will not fail to produce throughout Europe.
No. 19.—Sir Charles Stuart to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received, January 26.
(Extract.)
Paris, January
I saw M. de Chateaubriand yesterday. He told me that the duke of San Lorenzo had communicated to him the instructions which had been laid before the Cortes—that he must admit the moderation with which M. de San Lorenzo had spoken, respecting the situation of the two governments; but that a conciliatory tone is assumed by the agents of Spain, which does not prevent the adoption of principles the most incompatible with the tranquillity of Europe, by the government and by the legislature of that country—that at the moment they admit all the defects of their constitution, their readiness to concur in measures to produce a change, and their wish for the publication of a general amnesty, their societies are the most active in their endeavours to organize revolt in France:—in short, that the enormity of the evils resulting from war is not to be compared with the consequences which must result from the success of intrigues which the French ministers have no means of preventing during the continuance of peace. Without questioning the sincerity of the efforts of his majesty's government to maintain peace, he is convinced that it is impossible seriously to press the subject on the Spanish government in sufficient time to lead to the result we desire. The language of the French ministers shows that they would be glad to avail themselves of the publication of an amnesty, accompanied by any change, however trifling, if brought about by the authority of the king of Spain, which might enable them to avoid a declaration of war.
No. 20.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir William A'Court.
Foreign Office January
Sir;—Mr. Jackson arrived here on Tuesday night with your despatches to the 12th of this month, and on Friday that gentleman was re-despatched to Paris with instructions to sir Charles Stuart, founded on M. San Miguel's note of the 12th instant, requesting the good offices of his
943
Since Mr. Jackson's departure for Paris, I have received your despatch of the 15th instant, and therewith despatches from sir Charles Stuart, which appear somewhat more favourable to the preservation of peace, than any of the late reports from Paris.
As you will receive by Mr. Jackson, intelligence from Paris of five or six days later date, and so much the more important as the meeting of the French chambers will have taken place in the interval, it is useless for me now to speculate on events, which will be to you, when this despatch reaches you, matter of positive information.
I shall therefore at once proceed to state the course which you are to follow in either of the two possible alternatives,—1st, of the government of France having decided for war,—or 2dly. of its having consented to avail itself of the opening presented by M. San Miguel's note; and to make known through you to the Spanish government, the conditions on which it may be prepared to withdraw its Army of Observation.
In the former case, you have nothing to do, but to profess anew his majesty's fixed determination, to maintain during the war a strict and impartial neutrality: always ready at the same time to listen to any call for the renewed interposition of his good offices; if balanced success, or a reviving sense of common danger and mutual interests, shall better incline the contending parties to accommodation.
In the other case, you will probably receive from sir Charles Stuart a statement of the terms which the French government deem indispensable, either for their honour or for their safety, in breaking up that system of precaution, the continuance of which operates as a bar to pacification: and the time will then be arrived at which you can, without the suspicion of a dictatorial or an un-called for interference, press earnestly upon M. San Miguel a frank and friendly opinion, in support of such of those terms as appear to you to be not unreasonable. The amnesty which, if issued in the king's name, would, as it appears from sir Charles Stuart's despatch of the 23rd, be satisfactory to the French government, it is unnecessary for me to instruct you to urge; since you have informed me of your intention to urge it to the utmost of your power. Neither you nor the French government have over-rated the-effect which such an act would be likely to produce throughout Europe.
To liberate the person and family of the Icing not only from danger, but from the appearance of restraint,—to give something like force and free-will to the actions of the executive power—to rescue the deliberations of the Cortes from the overawing influence of the Clubs—are, next after the amnesty (which
944
These and any other objects of the same sort and with the same tendency, we are now, after the clear and practical proofs which we have given of our indisposition to claim any thing as of right, or to enforce any thing by menace, for the amendment of the Spanish constitution, warranted to recommend, with all the earnestness which is prompted by our tried friendship for the Spanish nation; by our experience of the practice of free government; and by our conviction of the sufferings and the perils which must be derived to Spain, and to Europe from war.
So long as our voice might have been confounded with those of other powers, who took a different measure of their right of interference—or with that of France, whose exhortation was accompanied with denunciations of hostility, we abstain from advising, rather than incur the imputation of attempting to control. But now, that the possibility of such misrepresentations is at an end, we cannot see the obvious dangers into which the present course of Spanish affairs is leading a brave and gallant people, and be silent; without abandoning the duty which is prescribed, no less by the obligations which international law imposes upon friendly states, than by the peculiar ties which connect Great Britain with Spain.
You will keep sir Charles Stuart constantly informed of the course of your discussions with the Spanish ministers. I am, &c.
(Signed) GEORGE CANNING.
No. 21.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir William A'Court.
Foreign Office, January
Sir;—I inclose to you a copy of the official answer
*
(Signed) GEORGE CANNING.
No. 22.—Sir Charles Stuart to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received January 30.
(Extract.)
Paris, January
I received your despatches of the 24th instant on Sunday evening. I immediately called upon M. de Chateaubriand, for the purpose of communicating to his excellency the note from M. de San Miguel, under date the 12th instant; and on the following morning I went over the reasoning contained in your letter, with a view of pointing out to the French minister, the
*
945
The French minister told me, that the substance of M. de San Miguel's paper had already been transmitted to him from Madrid; but that it had not been communicated to him sufficiently at length to show that M. de San Miguel merely demands the dissolution of the Army of Observation, without holding out any hope whatever of a concession upon points which menace the vital tranquillity of this country; though he must be well aware that, in the present situation of affairs, no French minister would be bold enough to propose such a measure, unless it should be justified by a corresponding concession on the part of Spain.
He added, that, under these circumstances, the king is compelled to assume a decisive tone in his discourse to the legislative bodies; and that in announcing the cessations of the diplomatic relations between the two governments, it is necessary to show that they cannot be re-established until the origin of the mischief, with which the Spanish revolution menaces neighbouring countries, has been removed; by assimilating their institutions to those of other limited monarchies, under an act on the part of the king of Spain declaring the constitution to emanate from the crown.
He hoped the anxiety of my government to maintain peace, would induce you to instruct sir William A'Court to convey these sentiments to the knowledge of the Spanish government; and to impress upon the ministers the expediency of not refusing to admit the only measure of which it is possible, in the present situation, to take advantage, with a view to the attainment of that object.
No. 23.—Sir Charles Stuart to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received January 30th.
Paris, January
Sir;—I inclose a printed copy of the Speech which his, majesty the king of France pronounced from the throne upon the assembly of the legislative bodies this morning. I have the honour to be, &c.
(Signed) CHARLES STUART.
No. 24.—Sir Charles Stuart to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received February 2nd.
(Extract.)
Paris, January,
Having sent off a messenger on Tuesday, at the moment a printed copy of the Speech from the throne was put into my hands, I was unable to make any observations upon that subject in any despatch of the same day.
M. de Villèle, whom I accidentally met on Tuesday evening, appeared surprised to find that I did not consider, the language of the speech perfectly in unison with the tenour of his excellency's former assurances. He said that, the violent alternative, to which the king refers, is mentioned in a
conditional
946
I could not avoid expressing my regret; that this public manifestation of demands for such changes in the Spanish, constitution, as the leaders in that country would hardly be persuaded to attempt, should not leave his most Christian majesty the means of receding from the position in which he has been placed.
Notwithstanding the strong evidence of Preparations for hostilities, I find both this minister, and his colleague, M. de Chateaubriand, continue to answer the representation of the consequences which must result from a rupture, by assurances that they do not participate in my uneasiness upon the subject, because they yet continue to entertain hopes that war will not take place.
No. 25.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir Charles Stuart.
Foreign Office, February
Sir;—On the same day on which your excellency's despatches of the 28th, one of them inclosing the speech of the king of France at the opening of the Chambers, arrived here, M. de Marcellus called upon me for the purpose of communicating a copy of that document.
In making this communication, M. de Marcellus took occasion to declare the unabated desire of his government for the preservation of peace; to renew in a more precise and formal manner their request of his majesty's good offices for that object; and to express their hopes, that our intervention at Madrid might yet avert an extremity, which (it must be confessed) the language of the French speech, unaccompanied by such a commentary, might have been understood to announce as unavoidable.
Such an intimation from the French ministry, at the moment when the decision of the king of France for war is the subject of general regret and alarm, places his majesty's government in a situation of great embarrassment; an embarrassment which is the more sensibly felt by them, on account of the necessity of making some disclosure of opinion in the speech to be delivered from the throne, at the opening of the session of parliament. On the one hand, his majesty's government would not willingly either risk the misfortune, or incur the responsibility, of closing, by any act of theirs, the door which the French government declare to be still open. On the other hand, the sense of the suspensive and conditional particle in the speech of the king of France, on which the possibilities of peace are supposed to bang, is so much obscured by the ambiguous character of the condition with which it is connected, that it is very difficult to estimate its real value.
It has become necessary on occasion, to reconsider maturely the position in which his majesty's; government stands towards that of France.
The answer which has uniformly been given by the British government to the questions put by France, as to the course which his ma-
947
In charges such as these, especially when urged (as some of these were at Verona) only as the grounds of a system of defensive preparation, his majesty's government saw nothing which rendered an accommodation hopeless. Spain on her side has, or professes to have, grievances to plead against France, of similar intermeddling with her people and her army. She alleges that France has encouraged dissension and disaffection at Madrid; and that she even by money and other means, fomented and stimulated the tumult of the 7th of July.
Such mutual recriminations appeared to the British government to furnish the elements of a discussion, in which something would be to be explained on either side; and in which reconciliation might at last result from mutual compromise and concession.
In this state of things the mediation of Great Britain was offered; and, under these impressions, her good offices have been employed. The question so far turned, principally, if not exclusively, upon facts; there was no declaration of principle absolutely precluding negotiation. But as the nature of the present political institutions of Spain was put forward, as being of itself a source of danger to France, and, at the same time, as susceptible of modifications by the voluntary act of Spain herself, which would remove the apprehension of that danger, and consequently open the way to amicable discussion on other points; the British government endeavoured to learn from France, what were the modifications in the Spanish constitution, which would give to France an assurance of safety and tranquillity; and they have not hesitated to advise, at Madrid, an attempt to bring about some such modifications; or at least the declaration of a disposition to consider of them when the time should be more propitious for a change.
There is no conclusive reason to apprehend, that, if the influence of British counsel had been left to its own operation (considering the weight of the authority under which it was offered) it would have been offered in vain. Even after the communication to the Spanish government of the despatches of the continen-
948
The principle put forward in that speech, as the basis of the French demands upon Spain, is liable to a double construction. If, as we are desirous of believing, the sentiment intended to be conveyed is no other, than that, in order to give stability to any modification of the present system in Spain, and to afford sufficient assurance to France to justify her in discontinuing her warlike preparations, the king of Spain must be party and freely consenting to any such modifications; and if your excellency shall obtain from the French minister an avowal that such is the intention of the speech; the British government will be most happy to continue at Madrid their amicable and earnest endeavours, to ascertain the means, and to recommend the policy of accommodation.
But it would not be right to conceal from the French minister, that a different construction is generally put upon the paragraph to which I refer. It is construed as implying, that the free institutions of the Spanish people can only be legitimately held from the spontaneous gift of the sovereign, first restored to his absolute power, and then divesting himself of such portion of that power as he may think proper to part with.
The Spanish nation could not be expected to subscribe to this principle; nor could any British statesman uphold or defend it.
We can conscientiously recommend to Spain to modify her constitution of 1812. The law of nations warrants the suggestion from one friendly power to another, of counsels for the melioration of internal institutions, provided that suggestion be made in good faith, and not in a spirit of dictation; and provided it be not attempted to be supported by force. But the British government could not advise any people, in adopting changes however beneficial, to admit the principle on which (according to this latter construction) the speech of the king of France would be understood to prescribe them. It is indeed a principle which strike, at the root of the British constitution.
The British government does not presume to hold out its own political institutions, as the only practical system of national happiness and freedom. It does not presume to question the freedom and happiness which France enjoys under institutions emanating from the will of the sovereign, and described as
octroyées
949
(Signed) GEORGE CANNING.
Memorandum—A copy of this despatch was transmitted to sir William A'Court on the 4th of February.
26.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received Feb. 6th.
(Extract.)
Madrid, January
Lord Fitzroy Somerset arrived last night. It has given me the greatest pleasure that a person so much versed in affairs, and so intimately acquainted with every thing and every body in this country, should see with his own eyes and report directly to his majesty's government, the real state of things here his arrival has been a very great relief to me.
No. 27.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir William A'Court.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office,
You will have learnt, by the ordinary modes of intelligence, the opening of parliament, and the reception, in both Houses, of that part of the king's speech which relates to the present position of France and Spain.
What impression may be made on the French government by this unequivocal disclosure of public opinion in England, I cannot pretend to foresee; but it can hardly be other than such, as,—if it were met at the same time with any reasonable facility on the part of Spain, which would afford to France a retreat without dishonour—might lead to a reconsideration of their plans, and yet arrest the fatal blow which is to commence hostilities.
I trust, however, that the report which the Spanish government may receive of these proceedings, will not lead them into a false security, by inducing them to place their hopes of extrication from their difficulties in a war between this country and France.
Neither the determination nor the means will be wanting, to vindicate, in any case, that might arise, either our honour, or our interests. But this consideration does not affect the immediately impending conflict between France and Spain. It is to the prevention of the commencement of the war, that the anxiety of the British government is, at this moment, exclusively directed; and that it is desirous of, directing the deliberations of the Spanish government; and the way to defer the present execution of the project of invasion of Spain is, that Spain should furnish us with some proposition, such as we could submit to the French government, with an earnest appeal to its policy, as well as to its justice.
No. 28.—Lord Fitzroy Somerset to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received February 10th.
950
(Extract.)
Madrid 3, January
With the approbation of sir William A'Court I communicated to—on the 22nd instant, the nature of the commission with which I was entrusted; expressing to him my hope that in a matter so materially affecting the welfare of his country, I should have the benefit of his assistance and co-operation.
I informed him that his majesty's government continued to adhere to the determination on which they had hitherto acted, of not interfering in the internal concerns of Spain; but that, deeply alive to the difficulties of her present situation, and most anxious to prevent her rupture with France, they had thought proper to try the effect of a confidential communication, which should make known to the leading characters in this country the sentiments of the duke of Wellington, who, as the friend and well-wisher of Spain, had consented to state his opinions, on the necessity of some alteration in the existing constitution.
I, at the same time, begged him to bear in mind, and to impress on those with whom I trusted he would communicate, that England demanded nothing of Spain; that she suggested nothing officially, and that her sole object in touching in any way upon so important a question, was the hope that it might lead to the adoption of a system, which should put an end to civil dissensions, and lessen the probability of a war with France.
I afterwards read to him the duke of Wellington's memorandum.
—was evidently a good deal startled at my communication, for which he professed himself to be quite unprepared; and he at once declared his conviction, that he could not be instrumental in the attainment of the objects to which I had called his attention.
He gave the British government full credit for the conduct they had pursued during the congress at Verona. He was deeply sensible of the value of the duke of Wellington's exertions on that occasion, and of his constant solicitude to promote the happiness and secure the independence of Spain; but, in the present situation of the country, he could not disguise from me the difficulty of prevailing upon any party to act upon the suggestions which were thrown out for their consideration in the duke's memorandum.
He acknowledged the defects of the constitution, and admitted the propriety of taking into consideration the expediency of modifying it hereafter, when such a proceeding should not be illegal.—He felt equally with myself the imminence of the danger to which the country was exposed, and that war was the inevitable consequence of a refusal to modify the constitution. Such a measure being, however, out of the question, the government had, in his opinion, nothing to do, but to await the evil which they could not avert.
Seeing that my reasoning made no impression upon—and that his reluctance to become a party in proposing any alteration
951
I have found several of my old acquaintances who are neither in the Cortes, nor in any situation of responsibility very ready to enter into conversation with me on the difficulties by which Spain is now surrounded, and on the necessity of some modification of the constitution. Some, indeed, are clamorous for such an amendment, and for the interference of Great Britain; but when asked how the first can be effected, or the latter made available to the exigencies of the moment, they are unable to furnish any satisfactory reply.
No. 29.—Sir Charles Stuart to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received February 13.
(Extract.)
Paris, February
After receiving your despatch of the 3rd instant, I called upon M. de Chateaubriand, and held a long conversation with that minister upon the subject to which it refers. Without under-rating the effect of his majesty's good offices to preserve peace, I found M. de Chateaubriand still extremely prepossessed with the notion, that the tone assumed in the speech of the king of France, is well calculated to induce the Spaniards to give way; and resolved, in spite of all I could say, to ground hopes of preventing war upon the result of that speech.
When I questioned his excellency respecting the interpretation of which his most Christian majesty's speech to the chambers is susceptible, be admitted that your account of the different constructions which are put upon that discourse, clearly exposes the doubts which have prevailed in the public mind upon that important question. He said, that whatever may be the interpretation which is attached to his majesty's expressions, by those who are determined to consider all the measures recommended by this court, to be proofs of their desire to reestablish an absolute government in Spain—his excellency never can believe that the communications which have taken place with the British cabinet, have been misunderstood to a degree which can authorize such suppositions. He does not hesitate to admit that, "in order to give stability to any modification of the present system in Spain, and to afford sufficient assurance to France to justify her discontinuing her warlike preparations, the king of Spain Must be a party, and consent to such modifi-
952
M. de Chateaubriand did not enter into any detail respecting the nature of the acts to which he alluded; but I understood him to refer to the project of allowing the king the nomination of councillors of state, and giving them a deliberative power, upon a similar principle with that of the American senate; to which might be added, a regulation fixing the amount of the qualification required, to render a candidate eligible to the second, or representative chamber.
With a view to avoid the possibility of any misrepresentation, I have read to M. de Chateaubriand that part of this despatch, which states the expectations entertained by the French government, and have ascertained that his ideas are correctly reported. The communication of the same extract to
*
No. 30.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received February 13.
Madrid, 27th January,
Sir;—the French minister received two despatches from M. de Chateaubriand by the last courier; the one to be communicated to M. de San Miguel at the same time that he demanded his passports; the other to be read to him, as well as to the king, previous to his departure.
The first, which has already been communicated, contains little more than expressions of regret, that the answer of the Spanish government should have been so very unsatisfactory, leaving no other alternative to the French government than of recalling its legation.
*
953
The second goes more into detail. It states that, after the fruitless efforts made by the representatives of the continental powers, as well as by sir William A'Court and lord Fitzroy Somerset (the last of whom, it must be observed, had not left Paris seven days, and was not even arrived at Madrid when the French despatch was written) to engage the Spanish government to listen to the suggestions of reason, and to adopt a line of greater moderation, no other course remains to the government of his most Christian majesty than that of recalling its minister from Madrid:—that this is the only step left for the maintenance of peace:—that the duke of Angoulême is upon the point of placing, himself at the head of 100,000 men upon the frontier:—and that if the king of Spain, released from his present thraldom, and placed at the head of his army, shall be allowed to advance to the banks of the Bidassoa, in order to treat with him, a firm and durable peace may be established between the two countries—the antient intimate connexion between France and Spain restored; and the fleets, armies and resources of France be placed from that moment entirely at the disposal of his Catholic majesty:—That France does not pretend to dictate to Spain the precise modifications she ought to adopt in her constitution; but in order not to expose herself to the charge of having intentionally left her wishes unexplained, she declares that she will not renew her relations of amity with this country, until a system he established, with the consent of, and in concert with, the king, assuring alike the liberties of the nation and the just privileges of the monarch; and until a general act of amnesty be passed in favour of every individual persecuted for political offences from the promulgation of the constitution in 1812, down to the present period.
I write this from recollection; but I am perfectly certain that, though I may not have given in every instance the precise words used, I have in no way varied from the meaning. This paper has already been read by general Lagarde to the king; and he will probably communicate its contents to M. San Miguel in the course of the morning. I have the honour to be, &c.
(Signed) WILLIAM A'COURT.
No. 31.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received February 17.
(Extract.)
Madrid, February
Mr. Jackson arrived this morning, bringing me several despatches from sir Charles Stuart, and amongst others, a copy of his despatch to you, sir, of the 28th ultimo, detailing his conversation with M. de Chateaubriand, after the communication of M. de San Miguel's note to me of the 12th January.
I immediately proceeded to make known the contents of this despatch to M. de San Miguel; being extremely anxious to prevent the adoption of any violent measures, in consequence
954
After I had read the whole to M. de San Miguel (and some parts of it, by his own desire, a second time), he broke out into exclamations against the general conduct of French government; expressing his conviction that a war was inevitable:—He said, that Spain would never admit that the constitution emanated from the king nor recognize any other sovereignty than that of the people that a manifesto was preparing, in which his majesty would speak his sentiments to Europe, and that these sentiments would be found in unison with the answer which he had lately delivered to the Cortes:—that Spain was prepared to repel force by force; and that France would find, that the war would be a much more serious undertaking than she seemed at present to imagine it would be.
He requested me to leave him for an hour the copy of sir Charles Stuart's despatch. I did not hesitate in complying with this request, upon the condition that it was to be considered as a strictly confidential communication.
No. 32.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received February 22.
(Extract.)
Madrid, February
Sir Charles Stuart has forwarded to me your despatch to him, inclosing M. de San Miguel's note, and a copy of his despatch to you of the 30th ultimo.
I must await your further instructions, after the receipt of sir Charles Stuart's despatch, announcing the manner in which this overture has been received by France, before I can venture to advance any further. By sir Charles Stuart's account, it appears that France has neither quite accepted, nor quite declined, our interference; and M. de Chateaubriand's statement of the conditions necessary to the establishment of amicable relations between the two countries, is so extremely vague, that I should really be at a loss to inform this government, if called upon to do so, what are the precise concessions which would ensure the maintenance of peace.
I shall, however, not lose sight of the amnesty, but press it by every argument in my power. I have some reason to believe that, such a measure will not be opposed by any party. One object is already gained, viz. that, of the shutting up of the Landaburian society. If this be followed up by a general amnesty, I shall not yet despair of arriving at that first of objects, the prevention of a continental war.
I had written thus far when I was interrupted by the arrival of M. San Miguel.
M. San Miguel observed, that with respect to modifications, there was neither a man nor-a party in Spain (were the ministry to be changed a hundred times) who would venture to propose their adoption, till the time pointed out by the constitution; and that, had any hopes been held out to me of an opposite na-
955
I told him that England had done, and would continue to do, every thing in her power to prevent matters from coming to such extremities; but my Own opinion was, that war was inevitable, if Spain were really determined to admit no modification in her present constitutional system. This would not prevent our endeavouring to avert such a misfortune by every means within our reach, short of involving ourselves in the quarrel; but that I could not flatter him with any hope that our efforts would be successful, unless we were enabled to hold out to France, the prospect of some concession on the part of this country.
A long and desultory conversation followed, which it will be unnecessary to repeat; in the course of which, M. San Miguel put very prominently forward, the evident acknowledgement of the intention to establish a permanent French interest in (Spain, contained in certain passages of the king of France's speech to the chambers.
No. 33.—Sir Charles Stuart to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received February 23.
(Extract.)
Paris, February
M. de Chateaubriand said, that he had turned over the subject in his own mind, with a view to decide upon what terms it might be possible to meet the proposals they might receive—and though he could not state the result of his reflections to be the expression of the sentiments of the French government,—yet be thought the subject might be taken into consideration, if the Spanish negotiators should engage at a future period, to modify their constitution; and, in the mean while, prove their good faith, by restoring the king to his physical liberty, and allowing him to frequent the
sitios,
No. 34.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received March 3.
(Extract.)
Madrid, February
The debate upon the subject of the removal of the seat of government, passed off without any thing being elicited from either party, which could give an opening for the discussion
956
sina quá non
No. 35.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received March 3rd.
(Extract.)
Madrid, Feb.
My hopes have been grievously disappointed with respect to the amnesty; which, I was confidently assured, would embrace every political offender. But neither by the committee, nor in the Cortes, has the slightest allusion been made to so general a measure, notwithstanding the hopes that were held out. The amnesty voted, is nothing more than an act of pardon for any "factious," who may lay down their arms before the 1st of April; without any retrospective operation in favour of those already in prison, or any allusion to those confined merely for political opinions. It is a mere act of policy, and by no means an act of grace; nor can it be expected to produce that favourable effect in France, which might have been insured by a more general measure.—A report was circulated a few days since, that the king, with the concurrence of the council of state, had determined upon a change of ministers:—from the variety of quarters from whence this report reached me, I was inclined to believe that it was not without some foundation, and that his majesty's intention was to have requested the council of state to choose a new ministry for him, selected from their own body. Alarmed by the reports in circulation, the ministers obtained from the Cortes this morning, the repeal of the decree authorizing the employment of councillors of state with the exception of these already employed.—The repeal of this decree, though it may not prevent a change of ministers, effectually puts an end to the administration which it was proposed to form.
957
No. 36—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received March 3.
(Extract)
Madrid, Feb.
Sir Charles Stuart's secretary arrived last night, bringing me your despatch of the 9th instant. He also brought me an extract of sir Charles Stuart's despatch to you of the 10th instant, by which I learn, for first time, the exact concessions which will satisfy France and engage her to put an end to her armaments. What use I shall be able to make of these communications, I cannot yet foresee. The Cortes were closed this morning in the usual form, after which the ministers tendered their resignations.
P. S. The resignations are all accepted, except that of the minister of finance. The heads of the several departments are to act as ministers till a new administration be formed.
No. 37.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received March 3.
(Extract.)
Madrid, Feb.
His Catholic majesty has been pleased to re-appoint the same ministers
ad interim.
No. 38.—Sir Charles Stuart to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received March 9.
(Extract.)
Paris, March
I cannot help thinking that there is in the language of the ministers a more pacific colour, than I had observed within the last three weeks; for both to myself, and to all those with whom they converse, Monsieur de Villèle and Monsieur de Chateaubriand express their hopes of averting a war, with a degree of confidence which induced me to observe to the latter minister, that the insisting upon a direct negotiation between the duke d'Angoulème and a Spanish prince, may be a great obstacle to success. His excellency answered, that although this mode of settling the question had been strongly urged, he could assure me the objects of the negotiation are too important, not to be sought for by the concession, if necessary, of this, or of any other mere point of form; and that if the Spanish government will empower any negotiator to treat, after a change of ministers at Madrid, he shall be able to look forward with confidence to the continuation of peace. I cannot, however, participate in the hopes, which the French cabinet found upon the intelligence they expect to receive from Madrid: I consider late events to be the prelude to war.
No. 39.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received March 13.
(Extract.)
Madrid, Feb.
M. San Miguel called on me this morning,
958
Having thus drawn his attention to what I was about to say, I produced your despatch of the 9th February, and an extract from sir Charles Stuart's despatch to you, of the 10th February; and proceeded to read to him those parts of each, which I thought the most calculated to produce a favourable effect, accompanying my reading with such remarks as the nature of the communication required.
M. de San Miguel listened with the greatest attention; but as soon as I had concluded, observed, that the British government was labouring under a delusion, in supposing any sort of modification possible. It would be a much easier thing to overturn the whole constitutional system, and to re-establish absolute despotism, than to concede even the most insignificant of the points which had been pointed out as the most likely to conciliate.
He was fully aware that England asked no modifications on her own account. He knew that we wished to preserve to Spain her constitutional system; that our only object in trying to engage her to yield upon certain points, was the conviction that if a war did break out, we must be, sooner or later, involved in it ourselves. He knew very well that we should not declare in favour of Spain at first; but nobody could be so blind as not to see, that, if the war was protracted, and other powers took part in it, England alone could not remain a passive spectator of what might be its results.
No. 40.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received March 16.
(Extract.)
Madrid, March
A Spanish gentleman at Paris has written from Paris to—,that the French government has declared that it will suspend hostilities if a general amnesty be granted, a verbal promise of modifications hereafter be given, a change of ministers take place, and the king be permitted to go to the waters of Sacedon. That the negotiation must be carried on at Paris through the mediation of the British ambassador;—quotes sir Charles Stuart as his authority, and refers his friends to me for further information. Now I have heard nothing from sir Charles Stuart since the 20th ult. when he still referred me to his despatch to you of the 10th of February, as containing the final determination of the French government. That determination is very widely different from the arrangement alluded to by—
No. 41.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secre-
959
(Extract.)
Madrid, March 9,
I saw M. de San Miguel this morning, and to my great astonishment, he asked me what were the precise conditions required by France, in case any questions should be asked him in Cortes. I repeated to him the conditions stated in sir Charles Stuart's despatch of the 10th February, and those (hardly to be considered official) contained in the same ambassador's despatch of the 21st February;
*
No. 42.—Sir William A'Court to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received March 25.
(Extract.)
Madrid, March
In a few hurried lines, written as the last courier was setting off, I communicated to you a singular conversation which had passed between M. de San Miguel and myself. I forbore to express any opinion upon this conversation; but whatever hopes some of his expressions were calculated to excite, are now entirely at an end.
No. 43.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir Charles Stuart.
Foreign Office, March
Sir;—The hopes of an accommodation between France and Spain, which his majesty has so long been encouraged to cherish, in despite of all unfavourable appearances, being now unhappily extinguished; I am commanded by his majesty to address to your excellency, for the purpose of being communicated to the French minister, the following explanation of the sentiments of your government upon the present posture of affairs between those two kingdoms.
The king has exhausted his endeavours to preserve the peace of Europe.
The question of an interference in the internal concerns of Spain, on account of the troubles and distractions which have for some time prevailed in that kingdom, was not one on which his majesty could, for himself, entertain a moment's hesitation. If his majesty's plenipotentiary at Verona did not decline taking part in the deliberations of the allied cabinets upon that question, it was because his majesty owed to his allies, upon that, as upon every other subject, a sincere declaration of his opinions; and because he hoped that a friendly
*
960
The nature of the apprehensions which had induced the king of France to assemble an army, within his own frontier, upon the borders of Spain, had been indicated, in the first instance, by the designation of the "Cordon Sanitaire." The change of that designation to that of an "Army of Observation" (which took place in the month of September last) did not appear to his majesty to imply more, than that the defensive system originally opposed to the contagion of physical disease, would be continued against the possible inconveniences, moral or political, which might arise to France, from a civil contest raging in a country separated from the French territory only by a conventional line of demarcation. The dangers naturally incident to an unrestrained intercourse between two countries so situated towards each other; the dangers of political intrigue, or of occasional violation of territory, might sufficiently justify preparations of military defence.
Such was the state of things between France and Spain at the opening of the congress at Verona. The propositions brought forward by the French plenipotentiary in the conferences of the allied cabinets, were founded on this state of things. Those propositions did not relate to any project of carrying attack into the heart of the Spanish monarchy, but were in the nature of inquiries: 1st, What countenance France might expect to receive from the allies, if she should find herself under the necessity of breaking off diplomatic intercourse with the court of Madrid? and, 2ndly, what assistance, in supposed cases of outrage to be committed, or of violence to be menaced, by Spain? These cases were all contingent and precautionary. The answers of the three continental powers were of a correspondent character.
The result of the discussions at Verona, was a determination of his majesty's allies, the emperors of Austria and Russia and the king of Prussia:—1st. To make known to the cabinet of Madrid, through their respective ministers at that court, their sentiments upon the necessity of a change in the present system of the Spanish government; and, in the event of an unsatisfactory answer to that communication, to recall their respective ministers; and to break off all diplomatic intercourse with Spain. 2ndly, To make common cause with France against Spain, in certain specified cases; cases, as has been already observed, altogether contingent and precautionary.
His majesty's plenipotentiary declined concurring in these measures; not only because he was unauthorized to pledge the faith of his government to any hypothetical engagement, but because, his government had, from the month of April 1820, uniformly recommended to the powers of the alliance, to abstain from all interference in the internal affairs of Spain; and because, having been from the same period, entirely unacquainted with whatever
961
No proof was produced to his majesty's plenipotentiary of the existence of any design on the part of the Spanish government, to invade the territory of France; of any attempt to introduce disaffection among her soldiery; or of any project to undermine her political institutions: and so long as the struggles and disturbances of Spain should be confined within the circle of her own territory, they could not be admitted by the British government to afford any plea for foreign interference. If the end of the last and the beginning, of the present century saw all Europe confined against France, it was not on account of the internal changes which France thought necessary for her own political and civil reformation; but because she attempted to propagate, first her principles, and afterwards her propagate, by the sword.
Impossible as it was for his majesty to be party to the measures concerted at Verona with respect to Spain, his majesty's plenipotentiary declared, that the British government could only endeavour through his majesty's minister at the court of the Catholic king, "to allay the ferment which those measures might occasion at Madrid, and to do all the good in his power."
Up to this period no communication had taken place between his majesty and the court of Madrid, as to the discussions at Verona. But about the time of the arrival of his majesty's plenipotentiary, on his return from Verona, at Paris, Spain expressed a desire for the "friendly interposition" of his majesty, to avert the calamities of war. Spain distinctly limited this desire to the employment of such "good offices," on the part of Great Britain, as would not be inconsistent with "the most strictly-conceived system of neutrality." Nor has any period occurred, throughout the whole of the intercourse of the British government with Spain, at which the Spanish government has been for one moment led, by that of Great Britain, to believe that the policy of his majesty, in a contest between France and Spain, would be other than neutral.
In pursuance of this request, and of his previous declaration at Verona, his majesty's plenipotentiary received instructions at Paris, to make to the French government the offer of his majesty's mediation. In making this offer, the British government deprecated, from motives of expediency as well as from considerations of justice the employment towards Spain of a language of reproach or of intimidation. They represented as matter of no light moment, the first breach, by whatever power, of
962
In addition to suggestions such as these, the British government endeavoured to learn front the cabinet of the Tuilleries, the nature and amount of the specific grievances, of which his most Christian majesty complained against Spain; and of such specific measures of redress or conciliation on the part of Spain, as would arrest the progress of his most Christian majesty's warlike preparations.
The French government declined the formal mediation of his majesty; alleging, in substance, that the necessity of its warlike preparations was founded, not so much upon any direct cause of complaint against Spain, which might be susceptible of accurate specification and of practical adjustment, as upon the general position in which the two kingdoms found themselves placed towards each other; upon the effect which all that was passing and had been for some time passing in Spain, produced upon the peace and tranquillity of his most Christian majesty's dominions; upon the burthensomeness of that defensive armament which France had thought herself obliged to establish on her frontier towards Spain, and which it was alike inconvenient to her to maintain, or, without some change of circumstances which would justify such change of counsel, to withdraw; upon a state of things, in short, which it was easier to understand than to define; but which, taken altogether, was so intolerable to France, that open hostility would be far preferable to it. War would at least have a tendency to some conclusion; whereas the existing state of the relations between France and Spain might continue for an indefinite time; increasing every day the difficulties of Spain, and propagating disquietude and alarm throughout the French army and nation.
But although his most Christian majesty's government declined, on these grounds, a formal mediation, they professed an earnest desire for peace, and accepted his majesty's "good offices" with Spain for that object.
Contemplating all the mischiefs which war might inflict upon France, and through France ultimately perhaps upon all Europe; and which it must inflict, more immediately and inevitably upon Spain, whose internal animosities and agitations a foreign war could not but exasperate and prolong—the British government was deeply impressed with the necessity of peace for both kingdoms; and resolved, therefore, whether invested or and with the formal character of mediator, to make every effort, anal to avail itself of every chance, for the prevention of hostilities. The question was now become question simply and entirely between Spain and France; and the practical point of
963
Nothing could have induced his majesty to suggest to the Spanish nation a revision of its political institutions, as the price of his majesty's friendship. But Spaniards, of all parties and descriptions, admitted some modifications of the constitution of 1812, to be indispensably necessary: and if in such a crisis as that in which Spain now found herself—distracted at once by the miseries of civil war, and by the apprehension of foreign invasion—the adoption of modifications, so admitted to be desirable in themselves, might afford a prospect of composing her internal dissensions, and might at the same time furnish to the French government a motive for withdrawing from the menacing position which it had assumed towards Spain, the British government felt that no scruple of delicacy, or fear of misconstruction, ought to restrain them from avowing an earnest wish, that the Spaniards could prevail upon themselves to consider of such modifications, or, at least, to declare their disposition to consider of them hereafter.
It is useless now to discuss what might have been the result of his majesty's anxious endeavours to bring about an accommodation between France and Spain, if nothing had occurred to interrupt their progress. Whatever might be the indisposition of the Spanish government to take the first step towards such an accommodation, it cannot be disguised that the principles avowed and the pretensions put forward by the French government, in the speech from the throne at the opening of the chambers at Paris, created new obstacles to the success of friendly intervention. The communication of that speech to the British government was accompanied, indeed, with renewed assurances of the pacific disposition of France; and the French ministers adopted a construction of the passage most likely to create an unfavourable impression in Spain, which stripped it of a part of its objectionable character. But all the attempts of the British government to give effect at Madrid to such assurances and explanations, proved unavailing. The hopes of success became gradually fainter: and have now vanished altogether.
It remains only to describe the conduct which it is his majesty's desire and intention to observe, in a conflict between two nations, to each of whom his majesty is bound by the ties of amity and alliance.
The repeated disavowal, by his most Christian majesty's government, of all views of ambition and aggrandizement, forbids the suspicion of any design on the part of France, to establish a permanent military occupation of Spain; or to force his Catholic majesty into
964
The repeated assurances which his majesty has received, of the determination of France to respect the dominions of his most faithful majesty, relieve his majesty from any apprehension of being called upon to fulfil the obligations of that intimate defensive connexion, which has so long subsisted between the crowns of Great Britain and Portugal.
With respect to the provinces in America, which have thrown off their allegiance to the crown of Spain, time and the course of events appear to have substantially decided their separation from the mother country; although the formal recognition of those provinces, as independent states, by his majesty, may be hastened or retarded by various external circumstances, as well as by the more or less satisfactory progress, in each state, towards a regular and settled form of government. Spain has long been apprised of his majesty's opinions upon this subject. Disclaiming in the most solemn manner any intention of appropriating to himself the smallest portion of the late Spanish possessions in America. His majesty is satisfied that no attempt will be made by France, to bring under her dominion any of those possessions, either by conquest or by cession, from Spain.
This frank explanation upon the points on which perhaps alone the possibility of any collision of France with Great Britain can be apprehended in a war between France and Spain, your excellency will represent to M. de Chateaubriand, as dictated by an earnest desire to be enabled to preserve, in that war, a strict and undeviating neutrality; a neutrality not liable to alteration towards either party, so long as the honour and just interests of Great Britain are equally respected by both.
I am commanded, in conclusion, to direct your excellency to declare to the French minister, that his majesty will be at all times ready to renew the interposition of his good offices, for the purpose of terminating those hostilities, which his majesty has so anxiously, although ineffectually, endeavoured to avert. I am, &c.
(Signed) GEORGE CANNING.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, April 15, 1823.
EX-OFFICIO INFORMATIONS IN IRELAND.]
Mr. Brownlow
rose, to bring forward his motion respecting certain law proceedings, if indeed they deserved that name, which had lately been instituted in Ireland, against certain individuals, for transactions which had taken place in the theatre of Dublin on the 14th of last December, and in which the prudence, temper, and discretion of his
965
966
967
"velut è conspectu libertas tolleretur."
968
969
970
971
—"it is twice blessed:
"It blesseth him that gives, and him that takes."
972
cum multis aliis.
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
Mr. Plunkett
said, that in rising on such an occasion as the present, the House would naturally suppose that he felt some degree of embarrassment. He had listened with great attention to the speech of the hon. gentleman. Many of the observations which had fallen from him were entitled to his entire approbation, and, allowing for some undue warmth which had characterised a portion of his speech, he was rather disposed to thank than to blame the hon. member for the temper in which he had brought forward this subject. But, at the same time that the hon. member had entitled himself to this acknowledgment, he could not but observe that he had indulged himself, in a very considerable degree of latitude, in the charge which he had felt it his duty to bring against the individual who now addressed the House. He could not help complaining, that when the hon. member brought forward a specific charge against him far having filed an ex officio information, after a bill of indictment had been ignored by the grand jury, he should have endeavoured, by all the powers of his eloquence, to involve him (Mr. P.)
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
per totam curiam.
ignoramus
988
ignoramus
989
990
991
ignoramus.
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
Mr. W. Courtenay
said, he thought it quite impossible, that the motion could have any other tendency than that of continuing and increasing the unfortunate spirit of party at present the bane and curse of Ireland. Ireland was degraded and rendered miserable, by a spirit of party, which it ought to be the object of every man to allay. What, then, would be the effect of this motion? In order to consider that point, they must consider the situation in which the parties were placed. It was only by attentively looking at that state of parties, that he had come to the determination to propose to the House the course which he thought it would be most advisable to adopt. His opinions and feelings certainly led him to put a decided negative on the motion; but other considerations would induce him to substitute an intermediate course. He took that course because he trusted the House would not be led to give what might be considered a triumph, to any of the parties into which Ireland was unhappily divided. An upright and impartial administration of justice in Ireland appeared to be the sole object of his learned friend. His learned friend had proved, that the power which he had exercised was legal and constitutional; and next, that it was necessary for the safety of the country. He would state it, as his deliberate opinion, that the attorney-general for Ireland had used his legal prerogative fairly and honestly; and he thought that his learned friend would have been guilty of a gross dereliction of duty, if, in consequence of the dread of popular clamour, he had shrunk from the discharge of his official functions. Could any one say, after hearing the evidence, that he had acted on any other ground but that of the sound discretion upon which a public officer was bound to proceed? The motion he intended to make would prevent the different parties from assuming a triumph on this occasion. He took that course, because he felt most strongly the necessity of allaying party spirit in Ireland. He concluded by moving. "That the other orders of the day be now read."
Colonel Barry
said, that three parts of the learned gentleman's vindication of his, conduct consisted or, a defence of the legality of his proceeding but nobody denied its legality. He had also tried to
1001
1002
l.
l.
cum multis aliis,
Lord Milton
said, he came down to the House prepared to support the motion.
1003
1004
Mr. Goulburn
said, he entirely concurred in all that had been done by his right hon. friend, and was ready to share the responsibility which attached to the measures he had adopted. The noble lord who had just set down had ascribed all the evils which Ireland endured to the difference of opinion which existed amongst the members of the government of that country: he had argued, that because the lord-lieutenant entertained a different opinion from that which he (Mr. G.) professed upon one particular point, it was impossible that they could both
1005
1006
Mr. Brougham
said, that in rising to speak upon this important question, he felt oppressed by many difficulties which weighed upon both sides of the case. On the one hand, he felt sincerely anxious to avoid doing any thing which would add to that mass of party animosity by which Ireland was already but too much distracted; while on the other, he felt that if he gave a direct negative to the motion, he should desert the duty he owed to that constitution which he conscientiously believed to have been infringed upon, however innocently, by his right hon. friend the attorney-general for Ireland. It was with double pain that he had felt himself bound to make this declaration. He had listened to the able and ingenious arguments of his right hon. friend; with every inclination to find him right; and above all, he had listened to him with strong political prejudices (for he was not ashamed to avow that he entertained them) against the quarter from which the accusation was supposed to come; and after all, it was with pain that he came to the conclusion, that the constitutional principle was distinctly against the attorney-general for Ireland. A dry legal question was, God wot, a dull subject for an argument in that House at any hour; but it would be particularly irksome at that late period of the night to enter upon a minute examination of the cases which had been quoted as precedents by his learned friend, eighteen in number, which were to be found in the books, or he should rather say which were not to be found in the books, but in manuscript, some of which, more or less accurate, were preserved in the Crown-office in this country; and others, of a more apocryphal character, were deposited in the Crown-office in Dublin, and were documents proceeding from a court in a country where sheriffs and grand juries acted in the manner which the house had heard stated that night, and where the rules of evidence were such as had been described by his learned friend, with a mixture of lamentation and laughter. He would, however, for the sake of argument, admit that all the cases were established precedents, and yet he would contend that not one of them decided the question at issue. His right hon. friend seemed to be perfectly aware of that, and commenced his speech by a most ingenious attempt to make all those cases available for him. He had begun
1007
ex rei necessitate,
1008
1009
1010
1011
Mr. Secretary Canning
agreed entirely with the hon. and learned gentleman in the sentiments expressed in the conclud-
1012
1013
Mr. Daly
would vote for proceeding to the order of the day, on an understanding that the learned gentleman would bring forward the motion to which he had alluded.
Mr. Brougham
expressed his intention of redeeming the pledge he had given, if no other member took up the subject.
The Attorney-Gencral
said, that the learned gentleman found fault with the way in which the attorney-general for Ireland had exercised the power of filing an ex-officio information, although he admitted the power to file such information. As to the legality of the proceeding, the point was so plain, that even the learned gentleman could not have a doubt upon it. He said, that the attorney-general had not the power to file an information, after a bill of indictment had been ignored by the grand jury. He (the attorney-general) was of a different opinion. He considered the proceeding of his right hon. friend as perfectly legal. The learned gentleman had said, that the cases cited were not applicable to the point in issue. He would not fatigue the House by going into those cases; but he would insist on it, that they all fully established this principle, that a criminal information might be filed after a bill of indictment had been ignored.
Mr. Scarlett
agreed, that the proceeding was not illegal. But the legality of it was one thing, and the constitutionality another. It by no means followed, that what was barely legal should be always adopted. The attorney-general on filing an information, was bound to stand by it; and, though the result might be unfavourable to his cause, it would still be better to abide by the decision of the jury. He was satisfied that the conduct of the attorney-general for Ireland proceeded from the best of motives; but he certainly had forgot what was due to the character of a grand jury.
1014
After a short reply, the motion was, with the leave of the House, withdrawn; and sir F. Burdett gave notice, that he would, on the 22nd, bring before the House the conduct of the sheriff of Dublin.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, April 16, 1823.
EDINBURGH FREE THINKERS' ZETETIC
Mr. Hume
presented the following Petition:
1015
1016
l.
l.
1017
Mr. Hume
proceeded to say, that when he received the petition, he wrote to the individual who sent it to him, stating it as his opinion, that the petitioners, if they felt injured, would have done better to apply to a court of law for redress. The answer he received was, that the petitioners did not complain of the conduct of the sheriff, nor of those who acted under his control, because the law of Scotland authorised the proceeding. He (Mr. H.) then referred to the English statutes.—The only act he found was the 49th of the late king, which authorised magistrates to interfere with respect to societies where money was received at the door as the price of admission. He was convinced that no police magistrate or other person in authority in England would act towards any such society as the sheriff at Edinburgh acted towards the society of Freethinkers. But by the law of Scotland he found, not only that such society might be dispersed—but that the persons forming it might be imprisoned, and actually hanged. An act of Charles 2nd, stated, that whereas there was no law against blasphemy in Scotland, if any person or persons who were not distracted in their wits, should rail at or curse God, they should suffer the punishment of death. He should add, that the individual who sent the petition to him, informed him that societies had been held in Scotland since the days of Mr. Hume; that never having intruded on public attention, they were never attacked by the public magistrate; that they had no other object but open and fair discussion, as being best calculated to promote knowledge, good morals, and virtue.
The Lord Advocate
said, that if the hon. member should propose an alteration of the law, he would be able to meet him on that ground. There was another statute besides that to which the hon. member alluded. An act of William and Mary
1018
Mr. Monck
said, he wished to know whether there were Jews in Edinburgh? Now, Jews were decidedly more hostile to Christianity than those philosophers who had fallen under the displeasure of the learned lord. The philosophers, it seemed, fairly discussed important questions. They did not form a party; for no two of them agreed in opinion; whereas, the Jews to a man ridiculed the Christian religion. The law of Scotland appeared, in this respect, more severe than the Inquisition.
Mr. Hume
considered the law a most horrid one. He was convinced that the Christian religion could only stand upon the ground of discussion and free inquiry.
1019
Ordered to lie on the table.
FOREIGN ENLISTMENT BILL.]
Lord Althorp
rose to make his promised motion, for the repeal of the Foreign Enlistment bill. He observed, that though the present question was one of considerable importance, yet the arguments for and against it, lay in so small a compass that, were he merely to confine himself to a statement of their nature, he should occupy a very short portion of their time indeed. He was afraid, however, that if he confined himself to such a statement, he should be liable to much misconstruction with one class of persons who were anxious that this country should take part in the present war, because he should declare himself a decided advocate for peace; and with another class, who, if he were silent with regard to the cause of Spain, might think him indifferent to its success, and regardless of the violent and unjustifiable attack which was making, through it, upon the independence of every nation. He therefore solicited the pardon of the House, if, in speaking upon this question, he should appear to touch upon subjects that were not altogether connected with it. In doing so, he should first apply himself to the question of peace and war. And here he must say, that no man could think war at the present moment, and in the present state of the country, a greater calamity than he did. Neither was he of opinion, that if war were now declared, it would be of service to Spain; since it might tend to produce greater union among its enemies. His decided feeling therefore was, that war ought not to be commenced: and, in making this motion, unless he should be able to prove, that the repeal of the act in question might be resolved upon, in strict conformity to the principles of neutrality, he would allow that he had made out no sufficient case. The question assumed a different appearance when it was said, that a declaration should have been made at an earlier period of the transactions—when we went to the congress of Verona—that if the allied powers should be guilty of the aggression against Spain which they had since entered upon, we he should be called upon to declare war. He fully agreed with the right hon. secretary of state, that no menaces should be uttered without the means of carrying
1020
1021
1022
Lord Folkestone
rose to second the motion. He said he was anxious to take the very first opportunity of expressing his feelings regarding the speech of the right hon. secretary (Mr. Canning), a few nights ago, and the papers which he had then laid upon the table. He never rose to speak, without being sensible that he was not a sufficient master of language, adequately to convey his sentiments; but upon no occasion had he felt this deficiency so strongly as at the present moment: indeed, he knew no terms that could express the disgust, shame, and indignation he had experienced on the perusal of the documents at the utter degradation they reflected upon this country. If he differed from his noble friend on the question of war, yet rose to second the motion he had submitted, he hoped he should not be thought guilty of any want of courtesy. It arose from his great anxiety to embrace the earliest occasion of adverting to the speech of the right hon. gentleman on a preceding night. To some parts of that speech be gave his cordial assent; and—since it was clear that we could not now go to war—especially to that part of it where he enforced the fitness of maintaining a strict neutrality. He too, hoped that it would be strict and impartial; that it would apply to both the belligerents; though he much feared that there was but too obvious a leaning to the stronger side. For instance, the right hon. gentleman had stated the Great Britain was bound
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
Mr. W. Lamb
said, that the noble lord who had just sat down, had spoken with much eagerness and vehemence, but though he had delivered his sentiments with considerable energy, he could ha felicitate him upon the consistency of his opinions. He had now spoken as strongly in favour of a war against the house of Bourbon, as he had formerly spoken in favour of a war in their behalf. He remembered the time when the noble lord far outstripped the minister of the day in the zeal with which he maintained the necessity of supporting the house of Bourbon. If there was a man in the country above all others responsible for the public debt, and bound to discharge it, it was the noble lord himself, who, above all others, had actively promoted the measures, by which that debt had beets incurred. It was true, that the noble lord had afterwards differed from his majesty's ministers, but in voting originally for hostilities he had made himself responsible for all the consequences of those hostilities.—It was not his intention to go into the general question of our foreign relations: for he had not yet had time to consider the papers on the table, with all the attention which was due to them. With respect to the proposition before the House, however, he begged to say, that neither upon any general or particular grounds was he prepared to vote for the repeal of tide Foreign Enlistment bill. He was aware that, in former times, it had been the fashion for gentlemen of chivalrous character to make campaigns in the service of foreign princes, and that bodies of men had been raised in this country to assist the Palatine, or the Protestants of France and Holland; but the state of European politics was now wholly changed. He objected to the principle of the reposed measure, because in his opinion the prerogative of deciding for war or peace was
1029
1030
Lord Folkestone
said, in answer to the assertion of the hon. member, that he, more than any other man, was responsible for the debt which had been incurred in the last war, that he was utterly at a loss to understand what he alluded to.
Mr. W. Lamb
said, he alluded to a speech of the noble lord in the year 1803, when the army estimates were brought forward, in which he had made the restoration of the house of Bourbon a
sine qua non.
Lord Folkestone
said, he had certainly advised the government to take up the interest of the house of Bourbon in opposition to Bonaparte; but he did not see how that advice made him responsible, more than any other man, for all the debt incurred in the last war.
Dr. Lushington
said, that the charge of inconsistency against his noble friend ill became the hon. member by whom it had been made; for if there was one member of that House to whom the charge of an abandonment of former principles could attach more deservedly than another, it was the hon. member for Hertfordshire. He did not accuse him of having abandoned his former principles from any undue motives; but the hon. member for all other men
1031
1032
1033
1034
Dr. Phillimore
contended, that the principle of allegiance ought to give the king such a power over his subjects as to prevent them from entering the service of other states. In the reign of George 2nd a statute was passed preventing the people of this country from entering into foreign service; but, as the penalty of that law applied only to their entering the service of states, under which title the revolted colonies did not come, it became necessary to pass the bill in question; and the passing of it was no new matter, as we were bound to the substance, and almost the letter of it by a treaty concluded four years previous to the time that the bill was passed. The learned gentleman went on to quote authorities to prove that the bill was not at variance with the received law of nations. It was the policy of this country to preserve a
bona fide
Mr. Marryat
felt himself obliged to
1035
Lord John Russell
said, he had formed an opinion in favour of the motion which
1036
1037
1038
1039
Mr. Thomas Courtenay
said, the question was not what had been done in centuries past, but what ought to be done now. The assistance given by queen Elizabeth to the people of the Netherlands had been immediately followed by a war with Spain: she knew well that must be the consequence of that assistance, and she had no objection to that consequence. This was, therefore, no precedent for us, whose object and determination, as stated by the noble lord who made the motion, was, to preserve neutrality. We could scarcely disguise from ourselves that the repeal of this act would prove beneficial to Spain. Upon what pretence then, could it be said to be a neutral proceeding? Several quotations had been made from the law of nations in favour of the view which gentlemen supporting the motion had taken, but others would be found no less applicable to an opposite construction. The hon. gentleman proceeded to read an extract from Grotius, b. iii, c. 20, sect. 31, to show that assistance given by the subjects of a neutral state, to one belligerent, is to the other belligerent a justifiable cause of war, if there be "apparent reason for believing that there is, in the government, an intention to permit it." Vattel, b. iii, c. 7, sect. 104, says, "neutrals ought to give no assistance where there is no objection to give it, nor voluntarily to furnish troops, arms, ammunition, or any thing of direct use in war. I do not say to give assistance equally, but to give no assistance." And even as to loans, aryl things not directly relating to war, he says, "if it was evidently given for the purpose of enabling an enemy to attack me, this would be concurring in the war against me." From all that had been written on this subject, it was clear, that they must look, both to the animus with which any measure was adopted, and to the effect it was likely to have with re
1040
Sir R. Wilson
said, that nothing had occurred since the debate, on passing the Foreign Enlistment bill in that House, which tended to alter the opinion he then held; namely, that it was an unjust, impolitic, and most degrading measure Unjust, because it was opposed to the generous feelings of the people of this country, and could not be carried into effect without revolting those feelings, and operating against the oppressed; impolitic and degrading, because it retarded the progress of freedom in other nations which was so important to this. The learned civilian op-
1041
1042
1043
Sir J. Yorke
said, be would not give way to his gallant friend, with respect to the warm feelings which he entertained towards the Spanish people; but, as this measure was not now to be enacted, but was merely to be continued, and as it was intended to preserve a strict neutrality, he was one of those that would not part with the Foreign Enlistment bill, by the repeal of which that neutrality might be endangered. In the seventh clause of the bill the greatest possible precaution was taken against the equipment of private ships of war. On a due observance of that provision depended the complete neutrality of this country. If it were repealed, a desperate war would probably be the consequence. He would confidently assert, that if private ships of war were allowed to be equipped, there would be such a flight of seamen from this country, so many of them would enter foreign service, that when we wanted to man our own navy, to protect our insular situation, there would be a great paucity of that
materiel
1044
Mr. H. Gurney
said, he was sure that he was speaking the sentiments of the very great majority in the country, when he expressed his gratitude to his majesty's government for having done all that in them lay, to preserve, at any rate to England, a continuance of the blessings of peace. He had voted against the Foreign Enlistment bill on its introduction, being dissatisfied with the enactments which followed Englishmen out of their own country, and more so, with the provision which made the government accessary to their taking foreign service, in requiring the king's license: but, common sense and common equity required, that open recruiting and fitting out armaments against powers in amity, should be prevented within the king's dominions; and, if this bill should now be repealed, it was obvious, that armed privateers would be issuing from our ports for what was neither more nor less than piracy, and would, in all probability, involve this country in war in less than a twelvemonth. For these reasons, entirely as he detested the principles on which the French were acting in their most iniquitous invasion of Spain, he should certainly vote against the motion of the noble lord.
Mr. Baring
said, if he did not hear better reasons against the repeal of the bill than those which had hitherto been offered, he should feel it his duty to support the motion; but, he would not give it even the humble aid of his voice, if he thought that the abandonment of this measure would plunge the country into a new war. But, when the country had safely and quietly existed for so many centuries under that state of things, to which, by the repeal of this bill, it would again return, he knew not on what principle it could be contended that they could not revert to it, without immediately hazarding a war. They must have to do with very touchy allies indeed, if they could not repeal this act without giving cause for war; and he thought the right hon.
1045
1046
Mr. Wynn
contended, that by the old law of England the raising of troops its this country for belligerent powers, or the fitting out of privateers for them in our
1047
Sir F. Blake
said, he should support the motion, in the hope that the representative voice of a great nation would not be heard in vain in France. He was of opinion, that if our government had assumed a higher tone throughout the recent negotiations, Spain would never have been invaded.
Mr. Secretary Canning
rose, and spoke to the following effect:—Sir; those hon. gentlemen—being by far the greater number of those whom I have the honour to address—who were not present at the commencement of this debate, can hardly imagine what a degree of restraint I impose upon myself, when I say, that it is my intention to confine myself, in what I am about to remark, strictly to the question before the House. For those who were not present cannot be aware that, from the very beginning of the discussion, there has been, whether studiously or accidentally, I know not, a sort of set-off against the figure which an hon. and learned gentleman last night applied to the benches on this side of the House, when he was describing what he conceived to be the variety of opinions by which those hon. gentlemen were influenced, who were nevertheless disposed to vote for the same proposition. Nothing cer-
1048
1049
1050
1051
bona fide
1052
1053
1054
1055
sine quâ non
1056
1057
Mr. Denman
said, he warmly supported the motion of his hon. friend, but did not wish to be understood as pledging himself to any measure from which a war was necessarily or even likely to follow. The hon. friends with whom he was in the habit of acting would, year after year, and session after session, without interruption, have called for the repeal of this odious
1058
After a short reply from lord Althorp, the House divided: Ayes, 110; Noes, 216.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Baring, A.
Honywood, W. P.
Barnard, visc.
Hughes, W. L.
Barratt, S. M.
Hume, J.
Benett, John
Hurst, R.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Howard, lord H.
Bentinck, lord W.
Jervoise, G. P.
Benyon, B.
Johnstone, W. A.
Bernal, R.
Kemp, J.
Birch, J.
Kennedy, T. F.
Blake, sir F.
Knight, R.
Brougham, H.
Lambton, J. G.
Browne, Dom.
Lemon, sir W.
Burdett, sir F.
Lennard, T. B.
Byng, G.
Leycester, R.
Calcraft J. H.
Lloyd, sir E.
Carew, C. S.
Lushington, S.
Carter, J.
Leader, W.
Caulfield, hon. H.
Maberly, J.
Chaloner, R.
Maberly, W. L.
Clifton, visc.
Macdonald, J.
Colburne, N. R.
Marjoribanks, S.
Creevey, T.
Martin, J.
Crompton, S.
Milton, visc.
Cradock, S.
Monck, J. B.
Davies, T H.
Moore, P.
De Crespigny, sir W.
Newman, R. W.
Denison, W. J.
Newport, sir J.
Denman, T.
Normanby, visc.
Ducannon, visc.
Nugent, lord
Ebrington, visc.
O'Grady, S.
Ellice, E.
O'Callaghan, J.
Ellis, hon. G. A.
Ord, W.
Evans, W.
Osborne, lord F.
Fergusson, Sir R.
Palmer, C.
Fitzgerald, lord W.C.
Palmer, C. F.
Glenorchy, visc.
Pares, T.
Graham, S.
Pelham, J. C.
Grattan, J.
Philips, G.
Guise, sir B.
Philips, G. jun.
Hamilton, lord A.
Power, R.
Heron, sir R.
Powlett, hon. J. F.
Hill, lord A.
Rice T. S.
1059
Rickford, W.
Tynte, C. R.
Robarts, A. W.
Warre, J.
Robarts, G. J.
Webbe, E.
Robinson, sir G.
Wharton, J.
Russell, lord J.
Whitbread, S. C.
Scarlett, J.
Whitbread, W. H.
Scott, J.
Williams, W.
Sefton, earl of
Wilson, sir R.
Smith, W.
Wood, M.
Stanley, lord
Wyvill, M.
Stanley, hon. E. C.
TELLERS.
Stewart, W. (Tyrone)
Althorp, visc.
Talbot, R.
Folkeston, visc.
Taylor, M. A.
PAIRED OFF.
Titchfield, marq.
Western, C. C.
Townshend, lord C.
Russell, Greenhill
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, April 17, 1823.
NEGOTIATIONS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.]
Lord King
said, that the papers which had been laid on the table had certainly given great satisfaction; the French ministers must be well satisfied with them; his majesty's ministers were satisfied with them; and the satisfaction of the public must be extreme, for every body laughed at them. What he now wished to know was, the expense at which all this satisfaction had been obtained. He had read the whole of the papers, and be though with a noble earl near him, that his majesty's ministers had been completely doped. They appeared, indeed, to have all that prostration of the mind and will so pleasing to divines, but so unprofitable to diplomatists. Looking at the whole of the transactions, he was firmly persuaded, that the French ministry must have known, that the noble earl opposite would be pleased at being duped. What he now wished was, to know what had been the expense of this extraordinary diplomacy. Every man must expect to be duped once in his life, and if it were done by a person who had before borne an ordinary good character, there was not much in it; but, after the previous character of the house of Bourbon, to be duped by them, was most extraordinary. The noble lord concluded by moving, for an account of the extraordinary expenses of foreign missions between the 1st Sept. and 31st Dec. 1822.
Lord Holland
wished to ask the noble earl opposite, whether there was any treaty, or stipulation in any treaty, between this country and France, or any other country, by which it was provided that the kingdoms of France and Spain should never be united under one head? He also wished to be informed if ministers
1060
The Earl of Liverpool
had no hesitation in saying, that, looking at all the treaties, they amounted to an obligation that the crown of France and Spain should not be united under one head. As to the second question he could only say, that he believed no such stipulation was in existence. With regard to the third question, the duke of Wellington had majesty's plenipotentiary, and was entitled to take part in all the points which might be brought under discussion.
Earl Grey
said, he looked through the treaties in vain for any stipulation by which the union of the crowns of France and Spain was precluded. The answer of the noble earl was not satisfactory; be cause a danger so formidable to the independence of Europe ought to be the subject of a distinct stipulation, and not be left to be gathered from construction. Having said so much on the first question, he would proceed to other points. The first observation he should make was the scanty nature of the extract from the dispatch of Mr. Canning to the duke of Wellington, dated Sept. 27, 1822: this contained the first notice of his majesty's minister respecting the design of France to interfere in the affairs of Spain; but he thought it did not contain all the information which it ought upon that point. It also appeared to him most extraordinary, that appeared to him most extraordinary, that no expectation should have been entertained that the affairs of Spain would become the subject of discussion at Verona.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that what he had stated, was, that it was not expected the affairs of Spain would be the prominent subject of discussion at Verona. He had also stated, that the instructions under which the noble duke went out, were the same instructions which were prepared for a late noble friend, and contained a distinct instruction on the subject.
Earl Grey
said, that whether there was and expectation of any discussion, prominent or otherwise, appeared to him to make very little difference. In the circular of the allies respecting the assembling of the congress at Verona, it was stated
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
The Earl of Liverpool
complained, that under pretence of asking for information, the noble earl had made a speech, in which he had entered into some of the most important parts of the great question which it was understood was to be discussed on another day. He felt himself, therefore, placed in an embarrassing situation. He must say, however, that the noble earl had given a very unfair representation of the first part of the negotiations at Verona, when he had inferred, from the questions put by the French plenipotentiary, that there had been previous conferences in which the principle of non-interference had been discussed, and had asked, whether the documents relative to those conferences would be produced? The communications on that subject were far anterior, and the view of his majesty's government had been clearly explained in a state paper drawn up by a noble marquis, now no more, in May, 1820. The noble earl next said, that it was strange we should have communicated to France all that passed between us and Spain, whilst France communicated nothing to us in return. But the government of this country made no mystery of its intentions with respect to Spain. It had nothing which it would shrink from avowing. The question of interference had not originally been raised by France, but by a paper published in 1820 by the emperor of Russia, and addressed to all the European powers. It was that document, and not any step on the part of France, which had called for the first expression of the sentiments of this country. She held no mysterious course, and her proceedings were so little matter of secrecy, that there was no step which his majesty's government took relative to Spain, that was not communicated, not only to France, but to all the other powers. They did not anticipated, however, that the affairs of Spain would become the prominent object of discussion at Verona. The noble earl thought it extraordinary that his noble friend should not, on the first starting of the question of armed interference in the concerns of Spain, have made a stronger remonstrance than he had done. But he contended, that the very first paragraph of his noble friend's note contained as strong a remonstrance as could be made. It must also be recollected that in the questions submitted by France to
1066
1067
Lord Holland
could not help declaring, that the noble earl had given a most unsatisfactory answer to all the questions which were put by his noble friend. The first question which had been put to the noble earl was, how it had happened, that we had communicated to France every thing we had done with regard to Spain, whilst France communicated, nothing to us upon the same subject? Now, what answer did the noble earl give upon this
1068
1069
1070
The Duke of Wellington
observed, in reference to the observations which had been made upon his conduct, that in his answer to the questions of the French government he had referred to the principle laid down by the late secretary of state in a document dated May, 1820, of non-interference in the internal concerns of other states. It was impossible to deny that that was the intention of the second paragraph of the answer commencing in the following words:—"Without adverting to those principles which his majesty's government must always consider the rule of their conduct, in relation to the internal affairs of other countries," &c. The principle was carried still farther in the answer which he had given, upon receiving-the despatches which the allied sovereigns had resolved to send to their minister at Madrid. He had there declared, that to animadvert upon the internal transactions of an independent state, unless such transactions affect the essential interests of his majesty's subjects, is inconsistent with those principles on which his majesty has invariably acted on all questions relating to the internal concerns of other countries," &c. Now, he really did not know how he could have expressed the opinions of his government in stronger terms than those which he had made use of.
Lord Ellenborough
gave notice, that he would on that day week submit a motion, which would afford their lordships an opportunity of expressing their opinion upon the conduct of ministers, in the late negotiations.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, April 17, 1823.
ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.]
Sundry petitions were presented against the Claims of the Roman Catholics. Amongst others.
Sir T. Lethbridge
presented one from the rev. sir Harcourt Lees of Dublin. The petition went to what he regretted to find was so much avoided by the advocates of the question; namely, the religious part of it, which was, in truth, its most important part. The hon. baronet then went through some of the details of the petition. They embraced a variety of, topics, but the principal were what the petitioner de scribed as the implacable disposition of the
1071
Mr. Luke White
denied that the allegations in the petition were true. Not one Catholic priest had appeared on the hustings during the last Dublin election. He spoke from his own knowledge of the Catholic clergy. They were a most exemplary body of men. If people were better informed regarding Ireland, its population would not be maligned and calumniated. A concession of the claims was not se much a boon to the Catholics, as a grant for the sake of the peace and security of the empire.
Mr. Coke
said, he had a petition to present from several of the clergy of the diocese of Norwich in favour of the Catholic claims. He was happy to say, that the petition was signed by a greater number of clergy than a similar petition which he had presented last year. The petition last year was signed by 48, the present by 55. The petition was so beautifully worded, that he should move that it be read.
The petition having been read,
Sir F. Burdett
said, he did not rise to declare his concurrence in the sentiments of the petition, which were so honourable to the parties from whom they proceeded, but to give utterance to his own feelings on this subject—to his own unqualified disapprobation of the annual farce carried on, year after year, for a great length of time, and conducive to no good purpose, and indeed to no purpose whatever, but that of sowing the seeds of well-grounded discontent in the minds of a large portion of the community. They had heard, not longer than two nights ago, from the former eloquent advocate of the Catholic claims, the secretary for foreign affairs, that there was not the least chance that the question would be carried in favour of the Catholics; then, if this was the case, why had that right hon. gentleman (Mr. Canning) consented to practise a deception upon the House and the country. Why had he employed himself in raising hope that was only to be deferred, and deferred only to be disappointed? Why had he contributed to irritate and excite the warm
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
Lord Nugent rose
, and was proceeding to express his admiration of the speech of the hon. baronet, and the impossibility he felt of acting with him by quitting the House at the present moment, when,
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, that he would not have presumed to interrupt the noble lord, had it not been for the resolution which the hon. bart. had just announced of leaving the house immediately. He wished to contradict flatly and in to, in the hon. baronet's presence, the words which the hon. baronet had imputed to him, whilst he had been accidentally absent from the house.—Seeing the hon. baronet resume his seat, Mr. Canning sat down, notwithstanding a loud call of the House for him to proceed,
Lord Nugent
then went on. He could not refrain, he said, from expressing his hearty concurrence in all the general reasoning of his hon. friend; but he must at the same time express his decided opinion, that the course he was about to pursue would be highly injurious to the cause of the Catholics. He trusted that his hon. friends would not, like the ministers, neglect their duty to the Catholics, and allow them to be beaten in a division. Whatever might his opinion as to the conduct of ministers, he would not now express it. He would simply state, that as long as this question was brought forward—no matter from which side of the House—no matter whether the ministry was strong or feeble, firm or vacilla-
1079
Mr. Secretary Canning
begged pardon of the noble lord for the interruption which he had given him; but having understood that the hon. baronet during his absence had brought an unfounded charge against him, he was desirous of giving it a positive denial before the hon. baronet left the House. The hon. baronet, he understood, had stated him to have said three nights ago, that he considered the success of the Catholic question as hopeless. Now, he begged leave to declare that he had never said any such thing—that he had never thought any such thing—and that he was conscious, after appealing to his judgment and to his recollection, that he never had used the words which the hon. baronet had imputed to him. What he had said was, to the best of his recollection, this—that he thought it hopeless, in the present state of the country, and of this, and the other House of Parliament, to form an administration which should agree upon this measure, and upon all other general measures, so as to be able to carry on the business of the nation. If any persons imagined that such a declaration was equivalent to a declaration that he thought that this question could not be carried without its being made what was technically called a government question, all he wished to have recollected was, that it was not he who had promulgated such an opinion. If any persons said, that the success of this question was hopeless, unless it was made a government question, let it be borne in mind, that it was their proposition, and not his. To whatever contradiction or refutation it might be liable, his proposition was—that the forming such an administration, as should coincide in their views upon this and all other public questions of importance, was, in the present state of the country, perfectly hopeless. He had always thought; nay, more, he had repeatedly said, that this question would make its way under any government which did not actually unite or openly set its countenance against it. That he had ever maintained that, with a government united in its favour, it could not be carried, was an absurdity too glaring to require from him any contradiction. He
1080
1081
Mr. Tierney
wished to stand clear of the fearful responsibility which would fall on the heads of those who occasioned the failure of the hopes of the Catholics. Like the right hon. gentleman and his noble friend, he would say, that let who would bring forward this great measure it should have his support. Convinced, as he was, of the rectitude of the course which he had hitherto pursued, it was not any difference of opinion among either its friends or its foes, that should induce him to swerve from the line of conduct which he had hitherto adopted, from a conviction that it was necessary to the welfare and to the security of the British empire. Having said thus much, he begged permission to add, that, in all the general reasoning of the hon. baronet he most cordially concurred. He should certainly give his vote in favour of the motion of the right hon. gentleman; but, in doing so, he must press his opinion that all hopes of success in it were at an end. Who it was that had destroyed the hopes of the Catholics, and turned them into despair, an impartial public and a still more impartial posterity would hereafter decide. He felt it to be a mockery, to come, year after year, to the discussion of a subject, of which the success, whatever it might once have been, was now, in substance, acknowledged to be hopeless. In making that observation, he begged leave to state his belief that the right hon. gentleman opposite had quoted very correctly the words he had made use of on a former evening; but the impression which those words had left upon his mind was the same as had been left upon that of the hon. baronet by the words which he had supposed the right hon. gentleman to have used. He did understand that the right hon. gentleman had concluded, that all hopes of succeeding in this cause were idle, unless an administration could be formed, of which
1082
Mr. Canning.
—I did not mean it, nor do I think such an administration necessary.
Mr. Tierney.
—Whatever the right hon. gentleman might think, the question never would be carried unless an administration was formed that would take it up fairly, honestly, and sincerely. It was not a new question, but one that had been debated for many sessions as regularly as the year came round. The year 1805, when Mr. Fox proposed it to the House, was the first time that it ever occasioned serious debate in this country; and he would ask them whether, after all the experience which they had since had of the opposition with which it had been received in another place, they could hope to carry it, unless government interfered actively in its behalf? He was aware that the question had been carried in that House; but what good was there in that, if the influence of government was not employed in carrying it elsewhere? The right hon. gentleman had asserted that it would be impossible to form a cabinet the members of which were all friendly to Catholic emancipation. He thought differently; and he would state the reasons why. How stood the Catholic question when the right hon. gentleman carried his bill. First of all, there was a new reign. That was an important circumstance in its favour; for he might say, without any disrespect to the memory of our late revered monarch, that his prejudices on the subject were so strong, such a bias had been infused into his mind by artful and designing men by whom he had been surrounded, as to lead him to declare that, even if both Houses of parliament were to pass a bill for the emancipation of the Catholics, he would employ the privilege which the constitution gave him, unusual as the exercise of it was—in modern times—and would put his royal veto upon it. Under such circumstances, it appeared to him, that gentlemen might take office without making any stipulations in favour of the Catholics; and he had stated, that he considered both the right hon. gentleman himself and a noble lord, now no more, justifiable in so accepting it. The difficulty, however which arose from the reluctance of he sovereign, was at length removed; and the crown devolved upon a sovereign whose
1083
1084
"So sweetly she bade me adieu,
"I thought that she bade me return."
1085
1086
Mr. Wynn
thought, that the charge of inconsistency came with an ill grace from the right hon. gentleman who had last spoken. He disliked the replying to any charge with a
tu quoque.
1087
Mr. Grey Bennet
said, that ever since he had sat in parliament he had uniformly supported the Catholic question; but so convinced was be now of the inutility of debating it, that he should positively take up his hat and leave the House if it came on. He had hitherto supported the right hon. and learned gentleman, because he believed that he advocated the cause with sincerity. But he now thought the affair was a perfect trick; or what, in familiar language, was called a humbug. It was not by fine speeches and by honied words—which no one could use better than the attorney-general for Ireland—but by actions, that the cause of the Catholics was to be served. He had heard the learned gentleman make the very speech alluded to by the hon. baronet; and yet be now saw him sitting on the Treasury Benches, acting with a government hostile to the question. He would tell the learned gentleman to his face, that he doubted his sincerity. Where was the utility of bringing forward the question when it was known that, even if it were carried in one House it was sure to be lost in the other? He would not be a party to exciting hopes which were not to be realised. He would not be a party to the farce of bringing on a debate upon the question; he would not put himself in the same cart with the set of comedians who were to act it. He objected to the annual showing-up, as it might be called, of the grievances of the Catholics; to the sessional unavailing motion of the learned gentleman, and others of his stamp. The only hope of the Catholics must rest upon the dissolution of a body of ministers, whose sole object—no matter at what expense—was the keeping of their places.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that after what had fallen from the hon. member for Westminster, he found himself compelled to address the House. He would be brief in his observations; but what he said, he wished to address to the hon. member for Westminster particularly. The hon. baronet had insinuated a doubt of the sincerity of his opposition to the present motion he had insinuated, that the fears which he professed to entertain for the
1088
1089
Mr. Wynn
, in explanation, disclaimed the intention of casting any imputation, personally, on his right hon. friend; and, if he had even formed any opinion unfavourable to his right hon. friend, the manner in which he had co-operated during the last twelve months in the plans for the amelioration of the Irish government, would have convinced him that no man was more ready to promote those beneficent measures than his right hon. friend.
Sir F. Burdett
thought that the right hon. secretary was somewhat nice in his objections. For ministers to be charged with insincerity in that House, had been no very extraordinary occurrence. But what he had said would rather have amounted to an admission of the right hon. secretary's sincerity; for he had offered to rest the issue of the debate upon the right hon. gentleman's own statement of the danger that would arise from the concession of this question.
Mr. Brougham
trusted that the House would pardon that anxiety which induced him to trespass upon its indulgence. It had not been his good fortune to be present at the earliest period of the somewhat premature discussion in which the House was engaged; but he was so impressed with the paramount importance of the subject which stood for discussion;
1090
1091
Mr. Secretary Canning
, I rise to say, that that is false.
The Speaker
, after a perfect silence in the House during some seconds, said in a low tone, that he hoped the right hon. secretary would retract the expression he had used. An individual of his high rank and station could not fail to be aware, that such an expression was a complete violation of the customs and of the orders of the House. He deeply regretted that, even in haste, it should have been used.
Mr. Canning
said, he was sorry to have used any word which was a violation of the decorum of the House; but nothing—no consideration on earth—should induce him to retract the sentiment.
The Speaker
said, that the duty imposed upon him was a difficult one—one which admitted neither of compromise, nor of pause for consideration. So circumstanced, he was not only justified in calling, but bound to call, upon the House for its assistance. It was not for him to remind the members of that House of their duty. Every gentleman who heard him, knew what was the proceeding which upon similar occasions the House had found itself driven to adopt. Was it possible that he could have mistaken the words? Or would the House deny their support to him if he should require the right hon. gentleman, who had used expressions which no member could on any occasion with propriety use, to say whether or not he was ready to recall them.
1092
Mr. Canning
said, he was ready to acknowledge, that, so far as the orders of the House were concerned, he was exceedingly sorry that any conduct or expression of his should have attracted their displeasure. But, if he was to be required to recall his declaration, by an admission that his impression was erroneous as to the expressions which had been applied to him, he could not in conscience do it.
The Speaker
said, that in calling on the House to assist him with its advice, he hoped it would not be supposed that he was not perfectly alive to any infringement of its orders. He did so because he, hoped and expected to be supported in exerting his authority to restore order, not merely in reference to a casual interruption, but in substance.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, there could be no question but that the language made use of by his right hon. friend, was language which, unquestionably, was unfit for any member of that House to apply to another. He would ask the, hon. and learned gentleman to consider, for a moment the language which he himself had used; and he was sure he would at once see that it would not have been borne by one gentleman from another. The hon. and learned gentleman unquestionably expressed himself with extraordinary eloquence; but he had also expressed himself occasionally with an extraordinary degree of warmth. And for his own part, he must be allowed to say, that had the terms which had been used towards his right hon. friend been so applied to him, conveying, as it appeared to him, the severest reproach, not merely as it regarded his character as a minister of state, but in a sense which, must be applied, personally, he did not see how he could have abstained from giving utterance, in language more or less measured, to the impressions which would have been made on his mind. The hon. and learned gentleman would be doing nothing inconsistent with his honour as a man, or as a member of that House, if he would enable his right hon. friend to retract the language he had used, by admitting that the expression he had made use of was not intended to convey a personal insult.
The Speaker
said, that when he had, requested the assistance of the House, he, had clone so in the expectation of receiving its support in restoring order. He was happy to find that the right hon. gentleman had discovered an instance of in-
1093
Mr. Brougham
being called on, was about to address the chair, when
Mr. Tierney
rose to order. His learned friend had been called on to explain, after an interruption of a most irregular kind, in which the term "false" had been applied to what he was saying. Now, certainly, the proper course to have taken, would have been to move that he words be taken down, after which the right hon. gentleman could have called on his learned friend for an explanation of them. But surely there was an end of every thing like debates, if, in the progress of a sentence, and before the conclusive sense could be ascertained, any member were allowed to interrupt another, by so strong an expression as that of declaring that what he was saying was false. Until the right hon. gentleman had retracted that expression, he could not, by the forms of the House, be entitled to require that explanation. Were he in the right hon. gentleman's place, he should feel no difficulty in withdrawing the expression, in order to give his learned friend and opportunity for explaining in what sense he meant to use the words which had led to the interruption.
The Speaker
said, he had understood the right hon. secretary to say, that, though the words might be recalled, the sentiment could not be retracted. The chancellor of the exchequer was of opinion, that the expression was applicable perso-
1094
Mr. Canning
said, that after mature reflection, with every possible respect for the orders of the House and the dignity of the chair, and being quite prepared to submit with perfect humility to any censure which the House might pass upon him, he was compelled to declare, that he could neither recall nor vary the expression he had made use of.
Lord A. Hamilton
said, that the orders of the House were so clear upon cases of this nature, that he thought it impossible for any thing short of absolute madness to prevent the parties from coming to a better understanding. If the expressions of his learned friend were objectionable, there was an orderly and convenient mode of coming at an explanation. Had that mode been allowed, his learned friend could not have hesitated to have given such an explanation as would have satisfied the House and the right hon. gentleman. But, when the orders of the House were so directly violated as they had been in this case, it became the duty of the chair, and of the House, to mark where was the first violation; and when the party who had violated the orders in the first instance, had so explained his conduct as to put him once more fair with the House, then it would be proper to call upon the author of the offensive language to explain or modify it. Now he felt that he had one course to take. It was a course perfectly consistent with those orders, which he trusted, the House would always continue to preserve. He must, in conformity with those orders, call upon the chair to say who had been the first violator of those orders. It would then be the duty of the House to give their support to the chair in calling upon that first violator of their orders to retract. That being done, it would then follow as the next duty of the House, to
1095
Mr. Bankes
thought that the noble lord was mistaken in supposing that the Speaker had not already performed that duty which the noble lord had called upon him to perform; for he had already called on the first violator of the orders of the House to retract his expression. He was sorry that his right hon. friend had not complied with that requisition, which he might have clone consistently with his honour. He (Mr. Bankes) would have felt no difficulty in acknowledging his error in such a case. But, as that had not been done, and as the words used tended to a consequence which could not be mistaken, he felt himself compelled to recur to the only parliamentary course now left them; which was, to move that the parties be both taken into custody. The hon. gentleman then moved; "That the right hon. George Canning and Henry Brougham esq. be committed to the custody of the Serjeant at Arms attending this House."
Mr. Wynn
could not undertake to second the motion of his hon. friend, because he did not remember any instance in which the House had interfered, except upon some contempt being first shown to its orders. His impression was, that the expressions used by the learned gentleman were in a measure disorderly; but he did not at the time feel them to be so disorderly as to require him to call the learned member to order. The interruption of his right hon. friend was undoubtedly most intemperate and disorderly. At the same time, he did not concur with every thing which had been said as to the impossibility of adjusting the difference, the learned gentleman could have no difficulty in making one slight concession, which he might do with perfect regard to his own sense of honour, especially as all expectation of any worse consequences must be now at an end. They owed it to the country, to the interests of parliament, to the general freedom of debate not to allow the two members to leave the House until they had given their word of honour not to pursue this affair any further. That condition must be enforced. Now, as the learned gentleman could not feel any objection on personal grounds to give an explanation, seeing that neither party would be suffered to
1096
Mr. Brougham
again rose in consequence of being repeatedly called upon; but made way for,
Mr. Abercromby
who said, it appeared to him that the House was about to be drawn into a most inconvenient course. The first question before them was, that of a breach of order by the right hon. gentleman. That question was already settled by the general admission of the House. The next question was, had the right hon. gentleman given that explanation which would satisfy the House for the breach of order. The question upon the breach of order lay between the House and the right hon. gentleman. The Speaker had declared, that the right hon. gentleman had committed that breach of order, and the House would not discharge its duty, if it did not support him in demanding an explanation of the right hon. gentleman. There could be no mistaking the term "false." It was incapable of any but a personal application. Would the right hon. gentleman explain that expression? The House was certainly bound to prevent any farther consequences. All they could now do was to carry into effect the motion just made, unless the two members could be brought mutually to explain.
Mr. Wilmot
trusted the House would allow so humble an individual as himself to trouble them on this question, as his attention happened to have been particularly drawn to the expressions used by the learned member. He thought it far from desirable that the House should treat this matter too technically, and that if the learned gentleman could be put in a situation to explain his meaning, it would be preferable. [Cries of No!] His attention had been particularly drawn to the expressions in question, and he could most solemnly declare that he understood the words used to be in the highest degree personal. He did not say that they were meant in that sense; but if that was a correct description of them, then some allowance must be made for irritated feelings under a personal attack upon character. He should much regret if the, House went to the decision of this ques-
1097
Sir F. Burdett
could not concur in the view taken by the hon. gentleman who had just sat down. The language used was not irritating because it was personal, but because it happened to affect the individual to whom it was directed. The hon. member had evidently mistaken the nature of their orders, which, it was true, were technical, but at the same time they were formalities of the utmost importance. Now, what was the real case? His learned friend had used language which certainly was such as might be used, such as he had heard used, to a public functionary: for there was nothing in that language which could be taken, except by the right hon. secretary of state, in any other sense but as applicable to his character as a public functionary. Nothing could be so disorderly and inconvenient as for gentlemen, the moment an objectionable expression occurred, instead of waiting for an opportunity of answering in the regular course, to interrupt the speaker by a negative, expressed in words so offensive, as to lead to the most dangerous consequences. Now, as to the avowal of the hon. member who had just sat down, if the words struck him as being so excessively improper, he ought instantly to have interfered. He should have required the words to be taken down, and then have asked his learned friend to declare whether or not he intended them personally. He regretted that that course had not been taken. At present, he did not believe any gentleman had a clear apprehension of their import. It was clear that there had been a breach of order of so violent a kind as to call for the immediate interference of the chair. But the proceedings which followed up that interference did not, to use a vulgar phrase, place the saddle upon the right horse. It would be impossible for his learned friend to give any explanation until after those offensive words had been retracted. This course the House had a right to expect; and he thought it would be most useless obstinacy to delay it.
Sir R. Wilson
was satisfied, that the expressions which had fallen from his learned friend were addressed to the right hon. gentleman in his official character
1098
Mr. Canning
said, that if he understood rightly the suggestion of the hon. gentleman who had spoken last, it was one which he should not be unwilling to receive and to act upon. He had already said, he was aware that he had committed a breach of the laws of the House. For that offence he expressed his regret, and his readiness to submit to whatever censure the House might think fit to visit upon it. Having said thus much as to his feelings towards the House, he begged, with respect to the suggestion of the hon. gentleman to be understood as acceding to it under the assurance that the learned gentleman denied the intention to convey any personal imputation in the language he had used—a denial, which if the learned gentleman did not make, be wished to be understood as retracting nothing. Personal he had considered that language; as it went to impute to him the acceptance of the office which he held, after having made unbecoming submissions to a high individual in the administration of the country for the sake of obtaining it. Such an imputation he felt to have been cast, not on his official, but his private character. If that imputation should be denied, he was ready to avow that in what he had stated subsequently, he was mistaken: if, on the Pother hand, it should be avowed, he retracted nothing.
The Speaker
said, that if the House would bear with him again, he was anxious to state in what manner the subject now struck him as being placed. It appeared, then to him that there were two distinct considerations before the House. The first was, that a breach of the order of the House had been committed. This was indisputable. The House would, upon this point, judge for itself whether
1099
Mr. Brougham
said, that if he were to consult his own feelings alone, he should wish to pass on without explanation to finish the sentence in which he had been interrupted. He wished, however, to remind the House that the call for an explanation of the expression which had been used did not proceed from him. The question now before the House was, whether the right hon. gentleman who had used that expression and himself, should be taken into custody. The ques-
1100
1101
1102
Mr. Secretary Peel
put it to the House, whether it was not their sincere conviction that a satisfactory explanation had been given, calculated to allay any unpleasant feeling that might have existed between his right hon. friend and the learned gentleman. With respect to the circumstances out or which the misunderstanding arose, he would say that the facts must have been grossly misrepresented to the learned gentleman; for that nothing could by possibility be more free from the imputation of truckling than the manner in which his right hon. friend had accepted office. He appealed to the House, whether this affair had not been satisfactorily terminated and ought not to be further proceeded in.
Mr. Bankes
said, he was perfectly satisfied, and begged leave to withdraw, his motion.
Mr. Tierney
said, the explanation which had been given on both sides must be equally satisfactory to the House and honourable to the parties. It only remained, therefore, for them to say, as he trusted they would, that they would think no more of the matter.
Mr. Canning
immediately rose, and said he should think no more of it.
Mr. Brougham
repeated the same expressions. He said, he had been frequently embattled against the right hon. gentleman on political occasions; no personal ill-will had ever remained in his bosom on any of those occasion; and non would on the present. He then re-
1103
1104
Mr. Hume
contended, that the relief of the Catholics was essential to the good government of Ireland, and was, therefore, to be considered only in the light of a great state measure. The slave-trade abolition was a question of benevolence, of humanity, and of wisdom; but the emancipation of millions of fellow-subjects stood on far more commanding grounds. For his part, he would never, however unpromising appearances might be, desert his post. He believed the gentlemen opposite would admit, that he was the last man to leave that House, even on the slightest occasion. The conduct of the attorney-general for Ireland, was most inexplicable. He proceeded to read an extract from a former speech of that right hon. gentleman, in which be stated the necessity of a united cabinet, with the view of carrying that great question; and having so done, he called upon the right hon. gentleman to reconcile his opinion then with his acceptance of a seat in the cabinet which was known to entertain a divided opinion upon that very question. The right hon. secretary of state for foreign affairs, in one of his speeches on the Catholic question, had declared, that "nothing could tend more decidedly to allay the heats and dissensions to which it had given rise, than by making it a cabinet question; the cabinet, be their other political opinions what they might, ought to examine this question in all its bearings, and bring it to a shape in which it might be practically dealt with." A stronger opinion than this could not possibly be given. The right hon. secretary had farther observed, that "the government had no longer any ground or excuse for leaving this question to be agitated at the suggestion of any person, at either side of the House, who chose to take it up; but they ought to take it into their own hands as a question of vital importance to the well-being of the empire." They here found the right hon. gentleman, when out of office, stating what ought to be the conduct of government; but, now, when he was in office, they heard him declare, that he would not bring the question forward, but that, if it were introduced by any person on either side of the House, he would vote for it. Was not this a delusion on the people of Ireland? He hoped they would see, from the debate which
1105
Mr. Martin
, of Galway, thought his learned friend would lay himself open to censure, if, after what had passed that night, he brought this important question to a vote. He disapproved of the conduct of those who had given notice of their intention to leave the House, if the discussion were introduced in any other way but as a cabinet question. It was destroying the question, for fear it should be lost. This sort of conduct reminded him of a gentleman, who, having received a challenge, retired to his chamber, and shot himself, leaving behind him a written paper, in which he stated, that "he had done so, for fear his antagonist should shoot him." They had heard it asserted, that the question could never be carried while there was a divided cabinet. With great humility he would take leave to say, that it might be carried, although the cabinet were divided: and if it were so carried, it would be more triumphant than if it were carried in a cabinet formed for that express purpose. There would be a great re-action of feeling throughout the country, if its success appeared to be owing to any legerdemain, which would not be the case if it triumphed in consequence of its own merits.
Mr. S. Rice
regretted the course which had that night been taken by several gentlemen who had always shown the greatest desire to watch over the interests of Ireland. Such conduct was unjust towards those who were anxious for the success of the question, and would, perhaps, prove disastrous to the Catholic cause. The great mass of gentlemen on the opposition side of the House, had been all along—while the question received from the cabinet but a divided support—the consistent, disinterested, and unvarying friends of religious liberty. He rose chiefly to
1106
Sir J. Newport
insisted, that the repeated discussion of the Catholic question had been productive of great advantage to the cause of truth and liberality. The more he looked into the subject, the more he was convinced that on the success of the measure depended the happiness of the empire.
Sir R. Heron
declared his determination of giving his humble support to the question whenever it should be brought forward.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table.
ROMAN CATHOLIC QUESTION.]
The Speaker then called on Mr. Plunkett. Upon which, sir F. Burdett Mr. Hobhouse, lord Sefton, Mr. Bennet, sir R.
1107
Mr. Plunkett
rose. He commenced by observing, that it was his intention to have that day presented a petition from the Roman Catholics Ireland, which had been agreed to by a considerable number of gentlemen—considerable, not merely with reference to their numbers, but also With reference to the rank and station which they held in society. Owing, however, to some mistake in furnishing the names of the petitioners, it was impossible for him, that night, to lay the document before the House. This circumstance did not, however, conclude him from introducing the Catholic question, because he was authorized by the Catholics of Ireland to appear in that Mouse as their advocate. Never in his life did he address the House under circumstances of such extreme difficulty as those under which he was placed at the present moment. He found he had to sustain the cause of the Catholics, not only against those who had been always opposed to them, but also against a considerable portion of those who had been ever looked upon as their friends. The cause had sustained a severe loss by the Secession of a large portion of hon. members who were in the habit of giving it their support, and who had very ostentatiously withdrawn themselves, for the purpose of marking their sense of the impropriety of the manner in which it was brought forward. But, if the cause had sustained a loss from the secession of those hon. members who had retired, it had suffered a still heavier loss from the speech of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Tierney) who remained within the House, with the intention of giving his vote in its favour. That right hon. gentleman had always been the friend of the Roman Catholic claims; he had always acted so; and he did not mean to impeach his sincerity. But he would say, that the greatest enemy which that cause ever had, never gave it so deep a wound as had that night been inflicted upon it by its antient friend. It was in vain that the right hon. gentleman and others endeavoured to throw on him the responsibility of the failure of the question. The responsibility of that failure lay upon those who had foretold in such ominous tones, its defeat, and who treated the subject as
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
Mr. G. Bankes
addressed the House, and with some difficulty obtained a hearing. He said, he could not help feeling that danger was to be found under the right hon. gentleman's motion. The body of Protestant clergy was deeply interested in the question. If Roman Catholics were once admitted to a share in the legislature
1122
Mr. Becher
contended strongly, that, although the efforts of the lord lieutenant might do much to restore harmony, complete and permanent tranquility could only be given to Ireland by a measure which would give equality of rights and privilege to all parties. It was the true and only remedy for Orangeism, and the other evils by which Ireland was now so grievously afflicted. [Cries of "adjourn!"]
Mr. Lambton
, in rising, was interrupted by cries of "Question, question!" "Adjourn, adjourn!" He observed, that if those gentlemen who were so clamorous below the bar, had but been silent for one minute, he should have delivered all he meant to say upon this question. His only object in rising was, to prevent his constituents and the country generally, from mistaking the motives which actuated him in giving his vote. All he intended to say at present was, that he should not vote for the present motion, not in consequence of any change of opinion upon this point; but because he conceived from the manner in which the question was brought forward by the right hon. the attorney-general for Ireland, it was a gross deception upon the Roman Catholics, and one to which he could not in any way lend his countenance. [Cries of "Hear, hear! Mixed with loud and repeated cries of "Question, question"—"Adjourn, adjourn"—"Clear the gallery," &c.]
1123
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, April 18, 1823.
ROMAN CATHOLIC QUESTION.]
General Gascoyne,
seeing the attorney-general for Ireland in the House, wished the right hon. gentleman would have the goodness to inform him, whether it was his intention to renew the measure which the House had under consideration last night. He was anxious to learn something certain as to the course which the right hon. gentleman intended to pursue. At present, the question stood in the nature of an adjourned one. [Cries of "No, no."]
Mr. Plunkett
said, that although the result of last night's discussion was not what he could have wished, yet certainly the question was not an adjourned one, and, therefore, could not be renewed without a notice. He had every disposition to satisfy the hon. member but he was not prepared in answer to a question thus suddenly put, to state what his future conduct with respect to it might be. That would, in a great degree, be influenced by the judgment of others. He had little discretion to exercise upon it. It was confided to his care by those who felt the greatest interest in it: and he stood, therefore, with respect to it, in the nature of a trustee, whose actions must be governed by the opinions of those whom he knew to be the friends of the measure. For his own part, he would say, that he saw nothing to induce him to renew the notice this session.
MILITARY AND NAVAL PENSIONS
On the Order of the day for the third reading of this bill,
Mr. Grenfell
opposed it, as an improvident bargain for the public.
Sir J. Newport
contended, that this bargain with the Bank was a direct violation of the statute of William and Mary, which prevented the Bank from becoming a dealer and jobber in public securities.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
defended the bargain made with the Bank,
1124
Mr. Hume
wished to be informed, why this bargain with the Bank, had been made in a hole and corner, secretly, and without any public competition. The right hon. gentleman's predecessor in office had given the public a pledge, that any bargain which he made for the sale of these annuities should always be made publicly, and be opened to the widest competition. Why had the right hon. gentleman abandoned that pledge? The price at which the bargain had been completed was detrimental to the public. He thought that, except in that House no 133 reasonable beings could be found to sanction it. He, therefore, called upon the House to reject it, and to break off the secret contraband trade, which at present existed between the chancellor of the exchequer and the Bank. He would move, "That the bill be read a third time this day six months."
Sir J. Yorke
said, that as he did not understand more than the four first rules of arithmetic, he would not pretend to compute the profit or loss which was likely to accrue from this bargain. What appeared strange to him was this—why the bargain had ever been made at all. As the dead charge was to extend itself over 15 years, was it intended that at the end of that period, every spectre of it should be defunct? And if so, what was to be done with those persons who were daily coming upon the half-pay-list? He could understand the policy of the plan, if at the end of the 45 years every man on half-pay was to be as dead as Julius Cæsar. But that was not likely to be the case. There was a constant supply for the half-pay list. Scarcely a day passed without some officer coming on the half-pay from the 200 admirals, 800 captains, and 3,000 lieutenants, who had rank in the British navy.
Mr. Ricardo
did not blame the Bank directors for making as advantageous a bargain as possible for their constituents. It was, however, an extremely improvident one for the country. He thought that there was also a constitutional objection to the
1125
Mr. Huskisson
answered, that the Bank was to be allowed nothing beyond the terms of the contract which were before the House. He contended, that the bargain was advantageous for the public, and that the Bank were permitted to deal in public securities. The manner in which they had allowed the power to lie dormant, so that, even the hon. member did not know it existed, proved how harmless it had been.
Mr. H. Gurney
said, he thought that in all the debates on this bill, the greatest evil had been the least, if at all, touched upon; namely, the extremely improper and dangerous investment of the funds of the Bank; this being a species of transaction contrary to every sound banking principle, and one which, drawn into precedent, must inevitably endanger the ultimate security of that establishment.
Sir F. Blake
opposed the bill. He said he could not express his hatred of the sinking fund in better terms than by the words "Delenda est Carthago."
Mr. Monck
suggested, that the contract was in violation of the act of William 3rd which prohibited the Bank from lending money on crown lands or public securities. As it was a matter in which they were pecuniarily interested, the directors and proprietors of the Bank who were members, ought not in delicacy to vote.
The House divided. For the third reading 140. Against it 91. The bill was then read a third time and passed.
MERCHANT VESSELS APPRENTICESHIP
On the order of the day for reading this bill a third time,
Mr. H. Gurney
said, he held in his hand a statement from the town of Yarmouth, in which they complained of those
1126
Mr. Ricardo
opposed the measure, as imposing injurious restrictions on a particular trade, and interfering with the private rights of the individuals connected with that trade. The right hon. gentleman opposite was bound to show, that there were some circumstances in this particular trade which ought to take it out of the general rule. He had, however, not only failed to do this, but he had failed to prove that the measure would afford any protection to private seamen. He should therefore move as an amendment, "That the bill be read a third time that day six months."
Sir I. Coffin
contended, that good seamen could only be obtained by educating them as apprentices. If men were not bound apprentices, they would be as ignorant of the profession at the end of seven years, as at the commencement of their service. The best sailors in the navy were those who had served in the coal trade. The protection given by the bill to second mates was a most beneficial provision.
Mr. Huskisson
said, the measure had given universal satisfaction to the shipowners, and he believed there was scarcely a man in the House, except the hon. member (Mr. Ricardo) who was not satisfied of its utility. The measure was unquestionably one of relief to merchants, and of essential benefit to the maritime interest.
Mr. Ricardo
withdrew his amendment; and the bill was read a third time.
MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES—WESTMINSTER ABBEY—CALEDONIAN CANAL.]
The House having resolved itself into a committee of supply, Mr. Lushington moved, "That 449
l.
s.
d.
Mr. Hume
wished to know whether any arrangement had been concluded to facilitate the admission of the public to Westminster-Abbey? The monuments erected in commemoration of public services were defrayed by the public, and that public were entitled to see them without being taxed 2
s.
1127
Mr. Lushington
said, that the fees were now the property of a person who had purchased of the dean and chapter the privilege of showing the monuments.
Mr. Croker
entertained great doubts of the legality of demanding money from persons visiting the abbey. He had searched with some care, but he had not been able to find any authority by which the churches were closed. He was aware that the clergyman was said to have a freehold right in certain parts of the church; but he believed he had no right to shut it up. He regretted to say, that the dean and chapter of Westminster had, on the occasion of the coronation, been so ill-advised, or so greedy, as to cut down some very fine old trees of fifty years growth, with the view of disposing of additional ground for erecting scaffolding. The loss of the ornament to the public was great; while the profit to the chapter did not, perhaps, amount to 10
l.
Mr. Wetherell
said, that whatever doubts might exist as to the right of the public to admission to the abbey, it was a question which he should not wish to see pushed to its legal extremity, as the consequences might be mischievous.
Mr. W. Smith
contended, that the dean and chapter had no right to exact money front then public, to defray expences which ought to be met out of their own funds.
Mr. Hume
said, the public either had or had not the right for which he contended. If they had, he had no idea of a compromise. That was a course which might suit lawyers; but he did not approve of it. Was the secretary for the Treasury disposed to try the question. If he would supply the money, he (Mr. Hume) would soon set the affair in motion. If the decision of a jury should be against the public, they would only be reduced to the necessity of buying the privilege; for the dean and chapter who had sold trees and stones, would sell any thing.
The resolution was agreed to. On the resolution, "That 25,000
l.
1128
Mr. Hume
expressed his regret, that, session after session, they were called on to grant money for this object. Three years ago 20,000
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
Sir H. Parnell
could not concur in the remarks of the hon. member. He could say, from having seen this canal, that he had taken a very erroneous view of this question. No grant had ever been voted for completing this canal. The grants which the hon. member referred to were specially required and given for opening the canal, and this had been accomplished last October. The present grant was for deepening the canal. It was now of the depth of 12 feet, and it was necessary at some places to deepen it eight feet more in order to obtain a depth of 20 feet throughout the whole line. The locks were of the depth of 20 feet, and the whole of the navigation was constructed for the same depth, except at the entrances of the lakes, and along a short part of the summit level. The hon. member had made a great mistake in saying the bottom of the summit lock was stone, and that it would require a very large sum to cut it out. The fact was, the bottom was gravel and mud, and could easily be deepened by dredging. The hon. member had made another mistake in saying that this canal would be of no use, and that only two or three vessels a year would navigate it. In place of this it appears that 218 brigs and sloops had passed along the Eastern division of 22 miles between last April and October; and that between the opening of the canal in October and the present month, 130 brigs and sloops navigated the whole line from sea to sea. Some of these vessels came from the coast of Ireland and Liverpool on the Western side, and from as far as Yarmouth on the Eastern coast. The trade from the Westward consisted of coals, slates, and lime. Flax was also brought from Ireland to Aberdeen. Herrings were sent from the Eastern coast of Scotland to Ireland; grain to Liverpool, and general cargoes to Glasgow. Twenty-
1129
l.
l.
Mr. Hume
saw no reason why they should form a canal, at the expense of a million of money, for the benefit of certain Highland gentlemen who now came forward and demanded remuneration for damages alleged to have been done to their estates; whereas, in point of fact, 25,000
l.
Mr. Arbuthnot
said, that the canal was, in reality, completed, but some alterations
1130
Mr. W. Smith
said, that when so large a sum had been already voted, it would be bad policy to stop short now, and refuse a grant which was of comparatively small amount.
Mr. Bennet
said, the House ought to know how long it would be before this work would be completed. He would grant an additional 25,000
l.
Mr. Hume
asked, whether there was any estimate of the sum which would hereafter be required.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he had read the estimate of the engineer with great regret, because, from that document it appeared, that 25,000
l.
Sir H. Parnell
said, that the tolls on the trade would, in all probability, very soon defray the annual expense of maintaining the canal; and that there was no necessity of having steam-boats, because all the voyages he had already enumerated were made without their aid.
The resolution was agreed to.
COMPLAINT AGAINST "THE COURIER" NEWSPAPER.]
Mr. Bennet
said, that there had been put into his hand, a very short time back, the Courier newspaper of that evening, which pretended to give an account of the unpleasant transaction which took place in the House last night. As there were two holydays to intervene before the House would again meet, he took the earliest opportunity of bringing the subject under its notice as a statement in its nature calculated to revive those unpleasant feelings to which
1131
Here the matter dropped; and the House adjourned.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, April 21, 1823.
WAREHOUSING BILL.]
Mr. Wallace
having moved the third reading of this bill,
Mr. Bright
said, he must call the attention of the House to the state of this bill, which ought to be made more perfect before it was suffered to pass into a law. The powers left in the hands of the lords of the Treasury and the commissioners of Excise were truly frightful, and put the interests of trade in the most perilous situation. For instance, the forfeiture of a ship was to be enacted by the bill, for the bare attempt to unload any part of a cargo once loaded, and the mitigation of this punishment was left with the lords of the Treasury.
Mr. Wallace
said, he had a few amendments to propose, which he trusted would not meet the objections of the hon. gentleman. The first respected the bond required from the captains of ships. As that was found to work great inconvenience to trade, he proposed to abandon this provision, and substitute the bond of the owners. Another alteration related to goods removed from one port to another. At present, the bond of the first owner of the goods hung over him until they were delivered and regularly sold. He proposed to cancel the bond of the first owner in such cases, and take that of the purchaser instead of it. Another alteration regarded goods, which being imported for exportation might find a better price by being put into the home market. He would provide for that upon paying the difference. Another alteration would enable ship-owners to transfer stores which had not been consumed in a voyage, to another Ship going on another destination. The next alteration went to apply the regulations on shipping coffee, which now applied only to plantation coffee, to all
1132
The amendments were agreed to, and the bill was passed.
IRISH TITHES COMPOSITION BILL.]
On the motion of Mr. Goulburn, for going into a committee on this bill,
Mr. Spring Rice
said, he gave every degree of credit to the government for their efforts to remove the ill feeling which at present existed between the clergy and the population of Ireland, and he would afford them every assistance in his power to render the measure before the House efficient. He thought, however, that against the bill as at present formed, certain objections might be advanced, which, if they were not removed, would disappoint the hopes of those for whose benefit it was intended. When this subject was formerly discussed, it was said, that individuals could not see their way through a proposition for the commutation of tithes; and they were told, that to speak of apportioning a fair and just income to the clergy of Ireland, was a vain waste of words. If, however, when his hon. friend (Mr. Hume) made a proposition on that point, due attention had been paid to it, they would not have been called upon, as was now the case, to legislate under such discouraging increased difficulties. With respect to commutation and composition, two circumstances were to be considered—whether the matter was left open for arrangement to both parties, or whether it was confined only to one of them? Last year they had been told, that a compulsory adjustment would
1133
Mr. Goulburn
was of opinion that a bill involving such important interests could be more efficiently discussed in a com-
1134
Mr. V. Fitzgerald and col. Barry
argued in favour of referring the consideration of the measure to a committee above stairs; while sir J. Newport, Mr. Peel, sir H. Parnell, and col. Trench were of opinion that it could be more effectually discussed in a committee of the whole House.
Mr. Hume
said, that if his motion of last year had been adopted, the committee would now have nearly gone through their labours, and probably established, instead of the present system, a general fund for the payment, not only of the Protestant but of the Catholic clergy of Ireland. The time was not far distant when they must resort to such a plan. The present system was full of hardship and injustice, and led to many scenes of outrage. As the bill was before them, he thought it might be more advantageously discussed in a committee of the whole House than above stairs.
Mr. W. Smith
coincided with what had fallen from his hon. friend, and contended for that full inquiry into the system of tithes in Ireland; for the purpose of ascertaining some of the sources of those dreadful evils which afflicted that unhappy country.
The bill was ordered to be committed on Friday.
IRISH CHURCH RATES BILL.]
On the order of the day for the second reading of this bill,
Sir J. Newport
said, he must object to any measure that vent to give to the ecclesiastical courts such extended powers as this bill went to bestow on them. As an instance of the power already possessed by that court, he would mention the case of a poor man who, for a non-payment of certain sums, was cited to appear at a place 65 miles from his home. The man appeared, but the person who cited him was not present; the poor man had to return home again, and for his travelling expenses he was allowed by the court the sum of 12
s.
d.
1135
Mr. Goulburn
assured the House, that the powers of the ecclesiastical courts would remain precisely the same, whether this bill were passed or not.
Mr. Hume
contended, that the principles on which ecclesiastical courts proceeded were totally inconsistent with justice. These excessive rates were an enormous evil; and he was sure that the Irish people, upon whom they were so peculiarly oppressive, would not pay them much longer; but would effect the cure themselves by resisting the payment. Not more than one-fifth of the population of Ireland were Protestants; and it was not unlikely that that proportion would be soon reduced to a one hundred and fifth part. Was it, then, right to expect that such a population should be obliged to pay for the maintenance of a religious establishment to which they did not belong? He hoped they would discontinue to support such a system, and, if not relieved, that they would use physical force in order to avoid it [Hear, hear!]. Hon. members seemed alarmed at the expression; but it was his firm conviction, that if these acts of injustice were persisted in, matters must come to that extremity at last.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
protested against the use of such language. This doctrine was as calculated to inflame the minds of the Irish, as it was unbecoming any member of parliament to use in that House.
Mr. Hume
said, that what he had
1136
The bill was read a second time.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, April 21, 1823.
ADDITIONAL PAPERS CONCERNING THE
The following Papers were presented to both Houses, by his majesty's command:
ADDITIONAL PAPERS.—SPAIN—
SPAIN.
No. 1.—Confidential Minute of Viscount Castlereagh on the Affairs of Spain. Communicated to the Courts of Austria, France, Prussia, and Russia in May, 1820.
(Extract.) The events which have occurred in Spain have, as might be expected, excited, in proportion as they have developed themselves, the utmost anxiety throughout Europe.
The British cabinet upon this as upon all other occasions, is ever ready to deliberate with those of the allies, and will unreservedly explain itself upon this great question of common interest; but as to the form in which it may be prudent to conduct these deliberations, they conceive, they cannot too early recommend that course of deliberation which will excite the least attention or alarm, or which can least provoke jealousy in the minds of the Spanish nation or government. In this view, it appears to them advisable, studiously to avoid any re-union of the sovereigns—to abstain, at least in the present stage of the question, from charging any ostensible conference with commission to deliberate on the affairs of Spain. They conceive it preferable that their intercourse should be limited to those confidential communications between the cabinets which are, in themselves, best adapted to approximate ideas, and to lead, as far as may be, to the adoption of common principles, rather than to hazard a discussion in a ministerial conference, which, from the necessarily limited powers of the individuals composing it, must ever be better fitted to execute a purpose already decided upon, than to frame a course of policy under delicate and difficult circumstances.
There seems the less motive for precipitating any step of this nature in the case immediately under consideration, as, from all the information which reaches us, there exists in Spain no order of things upon which to deliberate; nor
1137
the king's authority, for the moment at least, seems to be dissolved. His majesty is represented, in the last despatches from Madrid, as having wholly abandoned himself to the tide of events, and as conceding whatever is called for by the provisional Junta and the clubs.
The authority of the provisional government does not appear to extend beyond the two Castilles and a part of Andalusia:—Distinct local authorities prevail in the various provinces, and the king's personal safety is regarded as extremely liable to be hazarded, by any step which might lay him open to the suspicion of entertaining a design to bring about a counter-revolution, whether by internal or external means.
This important subject having been referred to, and considered by the duke of Wellington, his memorandum accompanies this minute.—His grace does not hesitate, upon his intimate experience of Spanish affairs, to pronounce, that the Spanish nation is, of all the European people, that, which will least brook any interference from abroad; he states the many instances in which, during the last war, this distinguishing trait of national character rendered them obstinately blind to the most pressing considerations of public safety: he states the imminent danger in which the suspicion of foreign interference, and more especially of interference on the part of France, is likely to involve the king—and he further describes the difficulties which would oppose themselves to any military operations in Spain, undertaken for the purpose of reducing, by force, the nation to submit themselves to an order of things, to be either suggested or prescribed to them from without.
Sir Henry Wellesley has, in coincidence with this opinion, reported the alarm which the intended mission of M. de La Tour du Pin had excited at Madrid, the prejudice which, in the opinion of all the foreign ministers at Madrid., it was calculated to occasion to the king's interests and possible safety. He also reports the steps which it was in contemplation to have adopted on the part of the king to endeavour to prevent the French minister from prosecuting his journey to Madrid, when the intelligence of the abandonment of the mission was received from Paris.
At all events, therefore, until some central authority shall establish itself in Spain, all notion of operating upon her councils seems utterly impracticable; and calculated to lead to no other possible result, than that of compromising either the king or the allies, or probably both.
The present state of Spain, no doubt, seriously extends the range of political agitation in Europe, but it must nevertheless be Admitted, that there is no portion of Europe of equal magnitude, in which such a revolution could have happened, less likely to menace
1138
In the mean time, as independent states, the allied powers may awaken, through their respective missions at Madrid, with not less effect than would attend any joint representation, a salutary apprehension of the consequences that might be produced by any violence offered to the king's person or family, or by any hostile measures directed against the Portuguese dominions in Europe, for the protection of which Great Britain is bound by specific treaty.
In conveying any such intimation, however, the utmost delicacy should be observed; and though it is to be presumed that the views and wishes of all the allied powers must be essentially the same, and that the sentiments they are likely to express cannot materially differ, it does not follow that they should speak either in their corporate character, or through any common organ—both which expedients would be calculated rather to offend, than to conciliate or persuade.
There can be no doubt of the general danger which menaces more or less the stability oall existing governments, from the principles which are afloat, and from the circumstances that so many states of Europe are now employed in the difficult task of casting anew their governments upon the representative principle—but the notion of revising, limiting or regulating the course of such experiments, either by foreign council or by foreign force, would be as dangerous to avow, as it would be impossible to execute; and the illusion too prevalent on this subject, should not be encouraged in our intercourse with the allies.—That circumstances might arise out of such experiments in any country directly menacing to the safety of other states, cannot be denied; and against such a danger, well ascertained, the allies may justifiably, and must in all prudence, be on their guard; but such is not the present case.—Fearful, as is the example which is furnished
1139
In this alliance, as in all other human arrangements, nothing is more likely to impair, or even to destroy its real utility, than any attempt to push its duties and its obligations beyond the sphere which its original conception and understood principles will warrant.—It was an union for the reconquest and liberation of a great proportion of the continent of Europe from the military dominion of France; and having subdued the conqueror, it took the state of possession, as established by the peace, under the protection of the alliance.—It never was, however, intended as an union for the government of the world, or for the superintendence of the internal affairs of other states.
We shall be found in our place when actual danger menaces the system of Europe; but this country cannot, and will not, act upon abstract and speculative principles of precaution. The alliance which exists had no such purpose in view in it's original formation.—It was never so explained to parliament; if it had, most assuredly the sanction of parliament would never have been given to it; and it would now be a breach of faith, were the ministers of the Crown to acquiesce in a construction being put upon it, or were they to suffer themselves to be betrayed into a course of measures, inconsistent with those principles which they avowed at the time, and which they have since uniformly maintained both at home and abroad.
No. 2.—Instructions drawn up by the Marquis of Londonderry, and transferred to the Duke of Wellington, September 14, 1822.
(Extract.) With respect to Spain, there seems nothing to add to, or vary, in the course of policy hitherto pursued—Solicitude for the safety of the royal family—Observance of our engagements with Portugal—and a rigid abstinence from any interference in the internal affairs of that country—must be considered as forming the basis of his majesty's policy.
No. 3.—The Duke of Wellington to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received November 7.
(Extract.)
Verona, October
1140
If the allies should agree to recommend this line, and should enter into no treaty nor make any declaration, hostile to Spain, and France should then desire the good offices of England, I shall consent to give them. But if there should be any defensive treaty, or even declaration against Spain on the part of the allies, I shall consider it my duty to decline to become a party to either, and shall endeavor to make them feel, collectively, that the treaty or declaration will only render useless the efforts of the power which is to use its good offices to maintain peace; and I shall also decline to consent, on the part of my government, to use such good offices: but if pressed to do so, I shall take the demand
ad referendum.
No. 4.—Mr. Secretary Canning to the Duke of Wellington.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office, Nov.
No. 5.—(Translation) Memorandum relative to the conduct of Spain; communicated by M. de Jabat to Mr. Secretary Canning, on the 18th February, 1823.
If proofs of the moderation of Spain, and of the little foundation with which she is accused of following the system of propagating her political principles, be required—here are three undeniable facts: The junta of Oporto applies in 1820 for Spanish troops; refused:—The government of Naples, in the beginning of 1821, makes the same request; refused:—In 1822, on the application of France, the French refugees, captain Nantil, &c. were made to retire 30 leagues into the country, whilst the generals Eguia, Abreu, &c. and the self-named regency were organizing bands of the faith at Bayonne and Perpignan.
In 1822 we declined the services of three French regiments of the Army of Observation. Up to this day, no French soldier or peasant can be cited whom we have seduced, armed, paid, and thrust into the bosom of his country to devastate it. We have not raised the tricolour flag; we have not refused to publish a generous and salutary amnesty; we have not invited to evening assemblies of etiquette French outlaws and conspirators; we have not tolerated that an individual at Madrid should invest himself publicly with the title of chargé-ďaffaires of the regency of France, whilst his excellency, M. de Lagarde was ambassador of his most Christian majesty, at the court of his Catholic majesty. In fine, have done nothing (for these negative proofs might form too diffuse a catalogue)—we have
1141
If there be any question of verbal or written disavowals, England has received the most solemn disavowals on the subject of Portugal; Austria on the subject of Italy; and Europe, especially in the memorable sitting of the 11th January 1823, has heard the representatives of Spain declare, in appealing for the truth of it to the history of what passed from 1808 to 1814, and from 1820 to 1823, both, 1st. That their country will never interfere with the internal affairs of other powers; and 2ndly. That neither will she consent to the scandalous dictation which it is wished to impose upon her.
FRANCE.
No. 1.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir Charles Stuart.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office, March
M. de Chateaubriand will, I have no doubt, at once acknowledge that such an act of compliance with the wishes of the French government, enhances his majesty's claim upon France, to respect the solemn obligation of this article.
Your excellency will particularly remark to M. de Chateaubriand, that the treaty of 1814, was not negotiated till after our army had been withdrawn from Spain.
(Inclosure in No. 1.) Separate article.
His Catholic majesty engages, not to enter into any treaty or engagement with France of the nature of that known under the denomination of the family compact, nor any other which may affect the independence of Spain, which may be injurious to the interests of his Britannic majesty, or may be contrary to the strict alliance which is stipulated by the present treaty.
The present separate article shall form an integral part of the treaty of friendship and alliance signed on the fifth day of July, and shall have the same force and validity as if it
1142
In witness whereof, we, the undersigned plenipotentiaries have signed, in virtue of our respective full powers, the present separate article, and sealed it with the seals of our arms. Done at Madrid, this 5th day of July, 1814.
(L. S.) M. EL DUQUE DE SAN CARLOS.
(L. S.) H. WELLESLEY.
No. 2.—Sir Charles Stuart to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received April 10.
(Extract.)
Paris, April 7,
PORTUGAL.
No. 1.—Mr. Secretary Canning to Sir Charles Stuart.
(Extract.)
Foreign Office, Dec.
No. 2.—Sir Charles Stuart to Mr. Secretary, Canning.—Received December 15.
(Extract)
Paris, December
It appears from this correspondence, that M. Oliveira, the Portuguese chargé-ď affaires at this court, called upon M. de Villèle in the course of the summer, for the purpose of representing the anxiety to which the assembling of a representing force on the Pyrenees had given rise at Lisbon, and of expressing a hope that his excellency would give him a full explanation of the views entertained by the French government, with respect to Portugal. M. de Villèle assured him, that nothing could warrant any feeling of uneasiness on the pate of the Portuguese government; that the distance of that country had not permitted him to contemplate the possible effect, which the concentration of troops in France could produce upon a nation, with whose institutions or government the French ministers could have no desire to interfere.
No. 3.—(Translation) The Viscomte de Chateaubriand to the Portuguese Chargé ďAffaires at Paris. Communicated by the Viscomte de Marcellus to M. Secretary Canning, March 7, 1823.
1143
(Extract.)
The Portuguese government thinks fit to protest against the principle promulgated in the speech delivered by his majesty on the 28th of January, at the opening of the present session The king of France has a right to hold to his people the language which he thinks proper; and it would be difficult to understand how the Portuguese government can take umbrage at a speech addressed to the deputies of France.
If the French army should be obliged to enter Spain, the Portuguese chargé-ď affaires will be at perfect liberty to quit the French territory, in conformity to the orders he has received from his court.
If the French government is forced to declare war against the Spanish government, it is, not to support political theories, but because her immediate safety and her essential interests are compromised by the internal transactions of Spain. France, not being in the same situation with regard to Portugal, sees no plausible motive to induce the government of his most faithful majesty, to renounce the relations of peace and friendship. France hopes that she shall not have to repel an unprovoked aggression; nor to maintain a defensive war, which would have no other foundation or pretext on the part of those who should declare it, than the promulgation of a principle on which the political law of France is founded.
As to future arrangements respecting the residence of consuls, the French government sees no occasion to enter into any arrangement upon that subject, because it has never been the intention of his most Christian majesty to recall, either his chargé-ďaffaires or his consuls, from Portugal. He will in future adopt such measures as may be consistent with his dignity. The undersigned, &c.
(Signed) CHATEAUBRIAND.
No. 4.—(Translation.) M. de Chateaubriand to the French Chargé ď affaires at Lisbon. Communicated by Viscomte Marcellus to Mr. Secretary Canning, February 3, 1823.
(Extract.)
Paris, January
You have constantly been instructed to assure that government, that our armaments were not directed against Portugal;—that the maintaining a body of troops in the vicinity of the Pyrenees had no other object than to place us in a state of defence, should our territory or our institutions be menaced by Spain; and should the conduct of that power render a rupture unavoidable:—but that we separated the cause of Spain from that of Portugal, against which power we had no complaint; and that we wished not to see our relations with her interrupted.
1144
No. 5.—Sir Charles Stuart to Mr. Secretary Canning.—Received April 20.
Paris, April
Sir;—The Portuguese chargé-ďaffaires at this court has addressed a note to the Viscomte de Chateaubriand, stating, that, in virtue of the instructions he has received from his government, he considers the relations of amity between the two countries to have been interrupted, from the moment the French army, crossed the frontier of Spain, and that he must, therefore, demand his passports.
This communication has been answered by a note from M. de Chateaubriand, referring to former declarations, that it is the desire and intention of his most Christian majesty's government to continue at peace with Portugal; that if, however, the manifestation of these friendly sentiments will not induce Monsieur de Sampayo to suspend the execution of his orders, until the result of a reference to Lisbon shall be known, his passports will be delivered to him; but that the French ministers do not think it necessary., on that account to withdraw the chargé-ďafiaires, or the consular agents, who are actually employed in Portugal to maintain the usual relations between the two courts. I have the honour to be, &c.
(Signed) CHARLES STUART.
USURY LAWS.]—
Mr. Serjeant Onslow
, in rising to ask for leave to bring in a bill to repeal the Usury Laws, said, that he was encouraged to do so by the recommendation of a committee of that House, which had taken the subject into full consideration. After reading the resolutions to which that committee had come, in 1818, and contending, that if the conclusions which it had then formed were correct, nothing, had since occurred to invalidate them, he took a rapid review of the usury laws of this country, from their origin down to the present time, and insisted that they were not founded upon any principle of policy, but had their rise in religious prejudices. The learned serjeant quoted the authority of several writers, and the opinions of several witnesses examined before the committee, showing the inconveniences of a rate of interest fixed by law, without reference to circumstance, and concluded by moving "That leave be given to bring in a bill to repeal the Usury laws."
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
IRISH GOVERNMENT.]—
Mr. C. Grant
asked the patient indulgence of the House whilst he addressed a few words to it upon a subject in which he might be considered personally interested. The House
1145
Mr. Wynn
said, he had no difficulty in stating, that he had no intention of puting to any government of Ireland, or to any individual connected with it, any partiality in the administration of justice. If he conceived that any such partiality had been exercised, he should have felt it his bounden duty to bring it forward as a substantive charge. What he had stated had been to this effect—that in joining the administration he had reserved to him-self the liberty of supporting, or originating either in council or in parliament, any proposition which tend to ameliorate the condition of Ireland; amongst which he considered Catholic Emancipation to stand first and foremost. He had further stated, that the nomination of the marquis Wellesley as lord-lieutenant and of Mr. Plunkett, as attorney-general of Ireland, held out to him the prospect that firm and conciliatory government was about to be established in Ireland. He had likewise stated his opinion, that the existing laws should be equally administered to all classes of his Majesty's subjects in that country; and that the Catholics should be permitted to enjoy their fair share of those advantages to which they were entitled. In stating this stipulation, he did not intend to make any imputation on the preceding governments of Ireland. He felt that, when all those who differed as to the mode of governing Ireland agreed in the necessity of doing all that could be done to conciliate it, nothing
1146
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, this subject he must claim for himself and for those with whom he had acted in the administration of Ireland, that they had acted with most perfect impartiality. He would say further that a most scrupulous attention had been paid, to prevent the operation of any religious prejudices in the administration of justice. In any case where Protestants and Catholics were concerned in an outrage, instead of trusting to local representations, counsel of eminence were sent to the spot, and if there was a chance that they could not direct the administration of justice impartially, the law officers of the Crown were directed to take it into their own bands. So far from any religious distinction operating to an exclusion from offices to which they were legally admissible, he could say that in no one case had he made the inquiry, whether a candidate for office was Catholic or Protestant. In the whole of the six years that he was connected with the government of Ireland, he did not recollect a single instance in which any objection was ever made by any member of it to any individual because he was a Catholic. If his own particular feelings, as well as those of the other leading members of the administration, on the subject of the Catholic claims, had not been sufficient to produce impartiality in their conduct towards the Catholics, there were still two individuals in the administration—namely, the solicitor-general, and the chancellor of the exchequer for Ireland, who were distinguished for the zeal with which they advocated the right of their fellow country men to complete emancipation; and yet, though he differed in opinion with those gentlemen upon that subject, he had never differed with them in opinion in any question that related to the administration of justice, or to the admission of Catholics into such offices as they were by law entitled to fill. With respect to his own readmission into office, he would frankly declare, that he never would have consented to enter into any administration, had he supposed that there was an impression in the minds of his colleagues that he had been guilty of any partiality in the administration of justice, or in the admission of individuals in office. He had been appointed to the post of secretary of state for the home department, and had been placed in direct cor-
1147
REFORM OF PARLIAMENT.]
Mr. A. Pelham
presented a petition from the county of Lincoln, praying a reform in parliament.
Mr. A. Smith
, though not present at the meeting, was able to take upon himself to say, that it did not consist of more than 500, including men, women, and children. Much as the word had been stigmatized in the mouth of a noble duke, he would assert, that a more complete farce had never been played off than at the meeting at which this petition was agreed to.
Sir R. Heron
maintained, that the meeting was extremely respectable. The amendment of major Cartwright for a radical reform, as it was called, was negatived most decisively, only about twenty hands having been held up in its favour. It had been said, that the majority was against reform; if so, why did not they effectually resist the petition? That the enemies of all reform were numerously assembled on that day, he would not deny; for, in the reading-room at Lincoln, he had never seen so large a collection of big-wigs, shovel-hats, and short petticoats in his life. They, however, had not thought it right to stand forward, and the petition was carried.
Colonel Johnson
avowed himself a radical, however unpalatable the term might be in that House. He had seconded the amendment of major Cartwright, and was satisfied that the great majority of the people were in favour of reform.
Lord Milton
said, that the duty had been imposed upon him of presenting the petition of the freeholders of Yorkshire. The; petition, he might assert, was unanimously carried, and the persons assembled were at least ten times as numerous as at Lincoln; and generally it might be stated, that at least among the middling and inferior classes, great uniformity of opinion prevailed upon this question. When sixteen years ago, a contest took
1148
Mr. Stuart Wortley
, although be willingly bore testimony to the excellent conduct of the meeting, and to the high respectability of the names affixed to the petition, yet dissented entirely from the opinions which that petition expressed.
Mr. R. Colborne
, thought that the modern practice of publishing parliamentary
1149
The petition was then brought up and read. It was 380 feet in length.
Mr. Sykes
reminded the House, that the signatures had been fairly and openly obtained, at a time when, from the general cheapness of provisions, there was little incitement to discontent. He believed that for the present petition, the friends of reform were a good deal indebted to the late member for Liverpool, who now held so distinguished a place in the councils of the Crown (Mr. Canning). That right hon member, in a speech at Liverpool, had pointedly alluded to the reformers of the county of York. The county of York by its petition now answered the right hon. gentleman.
Ordered to lie on the table.
CONDUCT OF THE SHERIFF OF DUBLIN.]
Sir F. Burdett
said, he rose in pursuance of the notice which he had given of a motion growing out of the discussion of a question of a former evening relative to the late trials in Dublin. It was a subject which nothing but a sense of imperative duty could induce him to undertake. All who heard him must have witnessed, on various occasions, how unpleasant and even dangerous it was, to touch upon any of the circumstances connected with the misfortunes of Ireland. That country was in such a state of peculiar difficulty, that no question really affecting its interest could be discussed without giving rise to irritated feeling; but at the same time that it was painful to witness this, it was also the duty of the House to find out some alleviation for the evils of that country, and to ameliorate its condition, seeing that that condition was so intimately interwoven with the welfare and happiness of the empire. It was time to put an end to a state, which was that of a smothered civil war continually breaking out into acts of mutual hostility. If he believed that the bringing under the consideration of the House any of the transactions of party in Ireland would, instead of palliating, tend to irritate still further the feelings of the country, he should be the last person who would not be desirous to draw the veil of oblivion over every past event in the sister kingdom. But he looked upon it as childish, idle and vain, to be apprehensive of discussing Irish questions from the fear of
1150
1151
1152
1153
Mr. Plunkett
said, he meant to trouble the House with a few observations on
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
Mr. Denman
was of opinion, that the defence entered into on a former occasion by the learned gentleman did not excuse him, even if it were made out in evidence; and, if it were not substantiated by evidence, it really amounted to nothing. He thought the best way of showing the upright conduct of the learned gentleman would be, not by dragging forward another public functionary, but by entering on his own justification, when the question was fairly introduced. He thought the motion of the hon. member for Armagh had been very properly worded, because the offence complained of was, that recourse had been had to an ex-officio information, after the law officer of the Crown had taken his chance with a grand jury. He could not but look with astonishment at the circumstances out of which the proceedings arose. How a play-house riot, even though it might have been previously concerted, could be converted into high treason, and how under such a charge individuals could be kept in prison for several days, was what he could not understand.
Mr. Plunkett
denied that any charge of high treason had been made.
Mr. Denman
said, that undoubtedly the parties were sent to prison and confined there for ten days, because it was stated that there offence was an attempt to assassinate the lord-lieutenant, the king's deputy in Ireland; though that charge was subsequently withdrawn, and neither the grand nor the petty jury was called on to say, whether a plan had been laid to assassinate the lord-lieutenant. He, if placed in the situation of a grand juror, would have treated the charge with contempt. Looking to the information which he now had on the subject, he would have thrown out the bill. He had read the trial
1159
1160
1161
ex necessitate
Mr. Bankes
was of opinion, that the
1162
Lord Milton
thought, that the attorney-general for Ireland laboured under some misapprehension respecting the effect of the former debate. That learned gentleman now assumed, that he had obtained an acquittal, by the House passing to the other orders of the day; as if there was an inseparable identity between the merits of his case, and the demerits of the high sheriff. The impression made upon the House by the speech of the attorney-general had an effect unfavourable to the sheriff and the jury, but favourable to himself; but the learned gentleman should not conclude, that although the House might look unfavourably on the sheriff, they were at all satisfied with the conduct of the attorney-general. The learned gentleman had talked of corruption. No corruption whatever was imputed to him. There was indeed a charge of indiscreet exercise of authority; and had the motion of the member for Armagh been confined to that charge, he would have voted for it. The learned gentleman would now get out of the motion of the hon. baronet, by telling the House somewhat tardily, that he intended to prosecute the sheriff of Dublin. But instead of complaining of the member for Armagh for hanging the charge over his head for two months, be ought to be grateful to him for having given him an excuse for not sooner prosecuting the sheriff. If there were grounds for the transactions imputed to the sheriff of Dublin, there might be grounds for similar transactions throughout Ireland. At the bar of that House, and no where else, ought such an inquiry to be made; not so much with a view of punishing this identical sheriff, if guilty, as of holding out a warning to the sheriffs of Ireland generally.
Mr. Brownlow
said, he persevered in his opinion, that the conduct of the attorney-general for Ireland had been harsh, unprecedented, and unconstitutional. He hoped, that upon the present occasion there would be one unanimous feeling of the irresistible necessity of an inquiry, at the bar of that House, into the conduct of the high sheriff; in order that, should he be found as guilty as he believed him in-
1163
1164
1165
Mr. Goulburn
said, that if circumstances called for inquiry, he certainly should prefer the course proposed by his learned friend the attorney-general to that recommended by the hon. baronet. The House must perceive, that the question as it now stood, let it take what course it would, no longer involved the conduct of his learned friend or the Irish government. The question to be considered by the House was—not whether any suspicion could attach to the conduct of the attorney-general—not whether he had committed any error in judgment—but whether, upon the whole of the facts, there was
prima facie
1166
Colonel Barry
said, that if this had been a case of slight personal delinquency on the part of the sheriff, he should not wish the House to interfere in it; but, from the whole tenor of the hon. baronet's speech, he was confirmed in the idea, that public justice demanded this investigation. He thought, moreover, that such an investigation was not likely to be at all successful in its object if carried on in Ireland; and that even an ex-officio information was not competent to attain it. He called, therefore, on that House, as they loved justice and detested calumny (and here he begged to say, that he was far indeed from meaning to impute to the right hon. gentleman any thing like a designed calumny) he called upon them to bring the parties on their floor. He could by no means agree with the right hon. gentleman, that his conduct was now out of all question, for it was not the law, but the facts of the case, upon which that question must turn. The only step, indeed, that the right hon. gentleman could take, was an ex-officio information; and that could not now be effectual in that country.
Sir J. Newport
said, that, if the House showed an unwillingness to entertain this motion the dissentions in Ireland would be increased instead of being diminished Certain members seemed to think, that the course proposed by the hon. baronet was injudicious. If such were the opinion,
1167
Mr. Spring Rice
observed, that the right hon. secretary for Ireland had said, that the discussion of the other night had entirely disposed of the whole question before the House. To that proposition he must give his unqualified dissent. He would not agree to any new rule for the government of affairs in Ireland, unless it could be shown that those affairs required a different rule from that which obtained in this country. He did think, however, that if such a state of things were ever to exist in England as had recently existed in Ireland, the king's attorney-general would have been justified in adopting the same proceedings as the learned gentleman had adopted. The present question did not regard any, set of men, forming, the government of Ireland; but whether the grand jury or sheriff of Dublin possessed the power to intercept or pervert the administration of justice? Last session he happened to be placed in the chair of a committee upon the local taxation of Dublin. On that occasion it appeared, that the taxation of Dublin was principally managed through the agency of the grand jury; and in the report of that committee, it was expressly stated, that the election of the grand jury appeared to be always made from the corporation; while persons who were not members of that body, whatever other qualifications they might possess, were excluded from serving as grand jurors. The same thing was asserted in a memo-
1168
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, it seemed to be agreed upon all sides, that, in justice to the high sheriff and to all the parties concerned, some inquiry should take place. The question, then, was, what was the best mode of making such inquiry? He conjured the House to confine itself, in the consideration of this subject, to the principles which had ever guided them on such occasions—principles which in this instance would, he trusted, be separated from all party feelings. He appealed to any man who heard him, whether the arguments adduced for inquiry at the bar of the House were sufficient to show that this case was an exception from the general rule? The hon. member for Limerick had said, that the conduct of the grand jury ought to be inquired into. Surely the hon. member must have forgotten the terms of the motion. In that the conduct of the sheriff only was included. If they were to go farther, let it be so stated; but if they were not, let them confine themselves to the question before them. But, supposing the conduct of the grand jury was to be examined, how were they to proceed? Were they to receive the evidence of those whom the grand jury had examined, or of those who stated that the grand jury had refused to examine them? If they did this, how were they to put the grand jury on their defence? How could they call upon them to disclose that which they were bound by oath to keep secret? This was not a case in which the political circumstances of Ireland could be taken into consideration. The noble member for Yorkshire had argued, that this was a case where the House was bound to inquire not only into the conduct of the sheriff of Dublin, but into the conduct of sheriffs generally. Now, this was opposed by the hon. member for Limerick, who stated, that the case was widely different from that of other sheriffs: and this was a reason which would induce him to send the case for inquiry, to a court of justice, rather than to the bar of that House. From the loose statements made upon this question, most of
1169
Mr. Tierney
said, that if the question was merely whether the sheriff should be prosecuted in a court of law, or examined at the bar of that House, he would agree with the right hon. gentleman in the conclusion he had come to. But this was a greater and more important question. It was a question important to that part of the empire which had been incorporated with England by the Union. He would grant that the sheriff could not be formally tried at their bar, as he might be in a court of law; but he would contend, that the circumstances of this case were such as the House had a right to inquire into. The House, as the grand inquest of the nation, had assuredly a right to enter upon such inquiries as that now proposed. Let the House go back a few months into the history of this transaction. The blame arose out of what he would call the meritorious conduct of the attorney-general for Ireland; but, and he said it with great respect, it arose also out
1170
1171
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, it had been urged, that if the House consented to go into an inquiry at their bar, it would draw all the topics of the agitated state of Ireland—all its practical grievances, and a consideration of the mode of redress—into, discussion. He little doubted that it would take, a wider range than the motion described. But surely that was not a reason why they should adopt it, if the object was, to come at the facts of the case before them. It was plain that the speeches of honourable members on the other side must be much narrowed to meet the object of the motion, or the motion must be much enlarged to meet their speeches. For his own part, in occupying the attention of the House for a short time, he thought he should do well to follow the speech of the hon. mover It seldom happened that he could agree in the general topics of the hon. baronet's speeches; but he had seldom heard one in the general topics of which he more cordially agreed than that which the hon. baronet had that night delivered. He fully concurred with him, that in the whole transaction his right hon. and learned friend stood
rectus in curia.
1172
Mr. Brougham
said, that the chief objection urged against an inquiry at the bar of the House, was, the unfavourable effect which it might have on the future trial of the sheriff, if the House should think proper to direct a prosecution. But, was it not a little singular that the sheriff himself did not make such an objection; that, on the contrary, he should have petitioned for that very mode of inquiry? God forbid that justice should be violated in the person of any one—even in one of the Orange association! God forbid that, with the weight of the censure of that House hanging about his neck like a millstone, any man should be sent to take his trial! But, when the person himself came forward and entreated to be heard, was be to be told that he did not know his own case? This compromising government, however, had shut its ears against his
1173
1174
The House divided: For sir Francis Burdett's motion 219. Against it 185. Majority 34. The committee of the whole House to consider of the said inquiry was ordered to set on Friday, and Mr. Sheriff Thorpe was ordered to attend.
1175
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, April 24, 1823.
NEGOTIATIONS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.]
The order of the day for summoning their lordships being read,
Lord Ellenborough
rose to make his promised motion. Sensible as he was of the great importance of the subject to which he was about to call the attention of their lordships, and labouring under very considerable anxiety as to the manner in which he should perform the duty he had imposed on himself, it was not, he said, without embarrassment that he rose to address them. He confessed, however, that it was with much satisfaction he now saw this great question regularly submitted to the deliberation of the House; and since their lordships' attention was at length to be distinctly drawn to the situation of Europe, and to the examination of the conduct of his majesty's ministers in the late negotiations, all personal considerations as to the difficulty of the task were lost in his sense of the necessity and utility of the inquiry. He was, too, relieved from much of his anxiety, when he recollected that whatever points he might fail sufficiently to enforce, or might omit to notice, would not be overlooked by those noble lords who might fellow him. Painful as it was to him, under all tile circumstances, to make a statement that would cast blame on the conduct of his majesty's ministers, that pain was greatly increased, when he found the noble duke opposite implicated in transactions which his duty would oblige him to condemn. It had been his wish, as it doubtless was the wish of every man in the country, that the great name of the noble duke might descend to posterity pure and unblemished, and it was with infinite regret he felt that it would be impossible for him to perform his duty on the present occasion, without bringing into question the conduct of that noble duke with respect to the negotiations he had lately conducted; but he begged leave to observe, that no consideration of what had occurred in recent instances, would diminish his sense of the gratitude which he felt to be due to the noble duke for his former great and eminent services. It was not, however, consistent with the practice of a free state, or sound policy, under any system, to balance present errors in conduct by past services. The latter were not to be made an excuse for the former. Let
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
moral contagion
moral contagion."
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
The Earl of Harrowby
said that he was prepared to show, that throughout the whole of the negotiations before the House, his noble friend, the duke of Wellington, had acted to up to the letter and, spirit of his instructions; and that if blame could attach any where, which he did not admit, none could be attributed to his noble friend. He was rather surprised at the conduct which the noble mover had pursued on this occasion. He had thought, from the noble lord's notice that he would have come down on this evening with an unequivocal declaration, that it was more for the honour of this country that we should have gone to war than, remained at peace. Instead of this, however, the noble lord had brought a violent charge against the conduct of his majesty's government. A part of the noble, lord's complaint was, that a "more prompt, decisive, and unequivocal policy" had not been adopted by this government at the commencement of the negotiations; by which course the noble lord contended that peace would have been preserved. By this he understood the noble lord not to prefer war. The real question, however, which was to be decided, was, whether peace was, under all the circumstances, to be preferred to war; for unless it was meant to be contended, that we should have engaged in a war against France, and in support of Spain, the words "more prompt, decisive, and unequivocal policy" had no meaning whatever. Assuming, then, that it was better we should remain at peace—and he did not understand the noble lord to contend that we ought to have gone to war—he maintained
1195
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
Lord Holland
said, he would endeavour to show that the noble earl who had just, sat down had not taken a right view of the question before the House; that he had perverted all the historical facts to which he had referred; that the view which he had taken of the policy of this country
1203
1204
"War, he sung, is toil and trouble:
Honour but an empty bubble.
Lovely Thais sits beside thee,
Take the goods the Gods provide thee."
1205
"But shall it he, that you—that set the crown
Upon the head of this forgetful man;
And, for his sake, wear the detested blot
Of murd'rous subornation—shall it be,
That you a world of curses undergo;
Being the agents, or base second means,
The cords, the ladder, or the hangman rather?—
O, pardon me, that I descend so low,
To show the line, and the predicament,
Wherein you range under this subtle king.—
Shall it, for shame, be spoken in these days,
Or fill up chronicles in time to come,
That men of your nobility and power,
Did 'gage them both in an unjust behalf,—
As both of you, God pardon it! have done,
And shall it, in more shame, be further spoken,
That you are fool'd, discarded, and shook off
By him, for whom these shames ye underwent?"
1206
"That love may hope, when reason must despair."
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
Lord Granville
contended, that his majesty's ministers, in the conduct they had pursued, had consulted the best interests of the country, by using their utmost efforts to maintain a strict neutrality. On this occasion, although he had no doubt that if any circumstances of indispensable
1215
The Duke of Buckingham
said, he objected not only to the address, but to the arguments by which it was supported, though nothing could be more different from the argument of the noble mover than the address with which it concluded. The address preached peace; the arguments to enforce it were all for war. If he (the duke of Buckingham) was to go down with infamy to posterity, under the sentence of the noble lord, the noble accuser would be included under the same charge. Let the noble lord look at his own speech. He was condemning the interference with the politics of Spain: the whole tenor of his speech was, that they should interfere in the internal politics of France. The question was, whether this country should continue at peace, or should renew hostilities?—a
1216
1217
1218
The Duke of Sussex
expressed his acknowledgments to the noble duke for having taken such particular notice of him; but he could not help cheering when he heard the noble duke's observations respecting the balance of power. When he heard those observations he could not avoid calling to mind how seriously the balance of power in Europe had been compromised, particularly in the cession of Genoa to Austria; and he thought he might add the instance of Norway. In his estimation, those arrangements were not exactly consistent with the due maintenance of the balance in Europe. He would not further interrupt the debate: the subject of which was one of the deepest interest. He, however, would add, that his ideas on that subject, though they might be humbly expressed, were entirely contrary to those which had been uttered by the noble duke.
Lord King
declared, that, upon a review of all the transactions between France and Spain, the only inference he could draw, was, that England was to be kicked and cuffed about by foreign powers, because of the pusillanimity of a disgraced government. He had read the papers on their lordships' table with shame, grief, and disappointment. Throughout them, he could not find one honest or manly sentiment, one opinion suited to the occasion, one declaration becoming the character of candid, upright, and fair statesmen. He would not admit that this forbearance was attributable to a prudential policy. It was cold aparthy and indifference to the cause of Spain, and the cause of liberty. To find a parllel for such conduct on the part of a British ministry, their lordships must go back to the discharged times of the
1219
1220
The Earl of Aberdeen
defended the conduct of the noble duke, to whom the noble lord had so pointedly alluded, and said, that the whole progress of his negotiations had evinced the steady practical view which he had taken for the preservation of tile peace of this country. He had been charged with not foreseeing the determination of France to make war against: Spain. But, did any man believe that it was either the policy or the interest of France to wage such a war, if it were possible to avoid it; or that she would not have gladly refrained from hostilities were any concession made by Spain, to allay the cause of the disquietude of France, and to afford her a reason for withdrawing without reproach from the contest." But even if the noble duke had been as thoroughly persuaded of the duplicity of France as noble lords opposite now were, he was still prepared to contend, that the noble duke was justified in holding the language he maintained in the negotiation. Taking lord Londonderry's paper of 1821 as his guide, without involving himself in the noble duke's endless interchanges of notes, the noble duke wisely directed all his arguments, to show France the dangers that might follow the invasion of Spain. Such arguments, coming from such a quarter, were calculated to have weight in the French councils. But the noble lords opposite said that our negotiators ought to have asserted a higher tone, and to have adopted more menacing language. Had, however, such a course been adopted, besides increasing our difficulties, he questioned whether it would not have largely contributed to make the war against Spain popular in France.
1221
The Earl of Darnley
defended himself and his noble friends from the imputation
1222
The Duke of Wellington
said, that after the observations which had fallen from the other side of the House, he felt himself called upon to rise, at that early period of the debate, to vindicate the part which he had taken in the conferences at Verona. He thanked his noble friend behind him (lord Aberdeen) for having already urged so ably some of the topics on which his vindication would rest. He stood before their lordships, not only as the individual who had carried on the negotiations at Verona, but also as a member of the cabinet which had drawn up the instructions upon which those negotiations had been conducted, and he called upon the noble lords opposite to state to him whether, at the commencement of those negotiations, they would have taken measures of war or of neutrality for the basis of their future proceedings? As yet they had not declared whether they meant peace or war. Their arguments would lead to war, but they still seemed to lean to pacific measures to and he called upon them, therefore, adopt one line or the other. The government, however, of which he formed a part, had determined on preserving a strict neutrality. They sent him to Verona with instructions to that effect; and in conformity with the spirit of those instructions,
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
Earl Grey
said, he rose for the purpose of giving an answer to the question which the noble duke had put to the Opposition side of the House, though under a feeling of considerable despair that, if that question had not been sufficiently answered by his noble friends who had preceded him in the debate, it would be impossible for him to give such an answer as would be deemed satisfactory by the noble duke. The noble duke had asked them, whether they meant peace or war? He should, perhaps, argue at some length upon that point before he came to the conclusion of his observations, but, in the mean time, be would shortly state to their lordships, what his proposition was regarding it. Feeling, not as the noble duke on the cross-bench felt, that the balance of power was any thing or everything or nothing, but feeling that it was most essential that it should be preserved for the preservation of the tranquillity and independence of Europe; feeling, likewise, that it was subject to the greatest possible risk of destruction, if France were allowed to complete the conquest and subjugation of Spain, he would tell the noble duke, that, when he saw this country placed in a situation of danger, against which every country ought to be on its guard, and against which this country had been on its guard at every former period of its history; he would tell the noble duke, he repeated, that in the first place he would have made those temperate, but firm remonstrances which the justice of the case required to be made against those who meditated such unjust aggression; and in the second, that he
1228
1229
1230
1231
cordon sanitaire
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he was willing to allow, that in the course of what had fallen from the noble earl, he had given their lordships this advantage—he had spoken more distinctly than the other noble lords who had preceded him upon that side of the question, as to the course which they thought his majesty's government ought to have pursued. He never was so much surprised as when he came down to the House that night, and found the noble baron who introduced the question adopting such a course, and proposing such an address as the one which was now in the hands of their. Speaker to be laid from the woolsack. To him that address was perfectly unintelligible. He knew not what it meant. It was impossible to say whether it was for peace or war. From what had passed on former evenings, he had, indeed, understood that the noble baron was for war; but now the noble baron was afraid to declare it in his proposed address. The whole tendency and meaning of the noble, earl's speech who spoke last, was this, "You ought to have gone to war rather than suffer France to invade Spain: this ought to have been the doctrine held at Verona; this language ought to have been
1241
1242
1243
Earl Grey
denied that he had used any such words.
The Earl of Liverpool
observed, that be did not mean to say, that these were the precise words of the noble earl; but he contended that such was the sense of what the noble earl had then said. He perfectly well remembered that, when, in answer to some questions put to him respecting the state of our armies in the Peninsula, he stated his opinion as to the success of their exertions, the noble earl opposite had desired that those words should be remembered. It was now objected to, that this country should have recommended any alteration in the Spanish constitution under a foreign menace. But, was their no difference between the dictation of a hostile power and the suggestion of a friendly one? Did they ask the Spanish government to concede to their enemies that which they thought it would be wrong to change, or even that which they considered doubtful? No; but only such parts of their constitution as they all agreed were impracticable. And here again he must appeal to his memory as to the former opinions of the noble earl. He remembered, that at a time when this Country was engaged in a war of terrible magnitude, and, he believed, with a mutiny raging in her fleet at the same moment, the noble earl and his friends seceded from their duty in parliament, because they could not effect the most important alteration that ever was proposed to be made British constitution, under the name of a reform in parliament.
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, he would not have addressed the House on the present occasion, had it not been for the concluding sentiments of the speech of the noble earl; sentiments which, he would contend, were calculated to place this question on a ground perfectly fallacious, wholly remote from that on Which it had been laid before the House by his noble friend, and contrary to the statements contained in the papers on their table. He alluded to the concluding remarks of the noble earl as to the general state of Europe. He saw, with as much concern as the noble earl could possibly do, that opinions were advanced, in various parts of Europe, which, if carried to their full extent, would create confusion and disorder. But, when the noble earl stated that as a reason for adopting a system of avowed and determined neutrality on the part of this country, he must remind the noble earl, that this was a
1249
1250
1251
1252
Lord Ellenborough
shortly replied. He said, he must still maintain, upon the showing of the noble earl opposite, that the case which had arisen entitled the noble duke, according to the instructions which had been given by Mr. Secretary Canning, to interpose with more effect in the proceedings of the French government. As to the assertion of the noble duke on the cross-bench, with respect to the principles of the Spanish constitution, all that could be answered was, that they were founded on the principle of Runnymede—the principle of compelling sovereigns who wished to rule despotically, to acknowledge the rights and liberties of their subjects, and to admit institutions which would secure the enjoyment of them.
The House divided upon the Amendment: Contents, present 96; Proxies,
1253
List of the Minority.
Present.
DUKES
Fitzwilliam
Sussex
Fortescue
Somerset
Gosford
Grafton
Grey
Devonshire
Darnley
Portland
BARONS.
Leinster
Dacre
Argyle
King
MARQUISSES.
Holland
Lansdown
Foley
Bute
Suffield
EARLS.
Auckland
Derby
Erskine
Essex
Breadalbane
Jersey
Lynedoch
Tankerville
Ellenborough
Cowper
Proxies.
Duke of Bedford
Rosslyn
Marquis of Downshire
Minto
Bessborough
EARLS.
Viscount Clifden
Albemarle
BARONS.
Waldegrave
Dundas
Darlington
Yarborough
Charlemont
Cawdor
Spencer
Crewe
Grosvenor
Belhaven
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, April 24, 1823.
NORFOLK PETITION FOR A REFORM OF
Mr. Coke presented
the following petition:
"To the honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in Parliament assembled.
"The petition of the nobility, gentry, and others of the county of Norfolk, county meeting assembled, this 3rd day of January, 1823,
"Most humbly sheweth,
"That your petitioners have always been ready to make any sacrifices which were necessary to the defence of their country, and to the safety and dignity of their sovereign's throne; but that they are now impelled by their well-known, indescribable and unmerited sufferings, to approach your honourable house with an humble prayer, that you will be pleased to adopt the best means of relieving them from those sufferings:
"That, in proceeding to suggest those
1254
"That, whether we look at the church, the army, the courts of law, the customs, the excise, the colonies, or the crown-lands, we see in each a channel of enormous emoluments to these particular families, for whose benefit and aggrandizement, more than for any thing else, the whole of these sources of riches would appear to exist. And that, therefore, though justice and necessity demand a reduction of the interest of the debt, and an equitable adjustment of all other contracts, your humble petitioners would deem such reduction an act of deep iniquity, and they deem such adjustment wholly impracticable, as long as these particular families enjoy those emoluments, and as long as they retain in the legislature that absolute sway which they have acquired through the means of the Septennial act, in conjunction with the notorious and scandalous abuses connected with the representation:
"That it is well known to your honourable House, that, for more than twenty years, the particular families received a large part of the above-mentioned emoluments out of the money borrowed from the fundholders; that, during that period, more than a million of money was taken out of the loans to be given to the church; and that, in fact, no inconsiderable part of the whole of the loans went into the pockets of these families; and, therefore, your petitioners will not suppose it possible for your honourable house to harbour an intention to take even a single shilling from the fundholders, so long as these families shall continue to receive those emoluments.
"Your petitioners, therefore, most
1255
"But, while your humble petitioners are aware, that, to reform the Commons House, and to effect the other purposes of justice and necessity, which they have here most respectfully pointed out, may require a lapse of months, they know, that your honourable House have the power, and they will not believe that you want the will, to afford them immediate protection against further ruin. They, therefore, seeing the pressing nature of their case, seeing the abject misery that hourly awaits them, pray, that your honourable House will be pleased, 1. To suspend, by law, for one year, all distraints for rent, and to cause distraints to be set aside where they have been begun. 2. To suspend all process for tithes, for the same period. 3. To suspend, for the same period, all processes arising out of mortgage, bond, annuity, or other contract affecting house or land. 4. To repeal the whole of the tax on malt, hops, leather, soap, and candles.
"These measures, so analogous to others, taken by your honourable House under circumstances far less imperious; these measures, so easily adopted, so free from the possibility of inflicting wrong, pad, at the same time, so necessary to relieve your petitioners from the daily alarm in which they live, so necessary to afford, them a hope of escaping from the pains and disgrace of the lowest pauperism and beggary; to believe that these measures, measures of bare protection from further wrong and ruin; to believe that these will be refused to your suffering pe-
1256
"Having thus, with the most profound respect, submitted to your honourable House those which they deem the best means for relieving their distresses, your humble petitioners, though they are satisfied that evils so unusual and of such uncommon magnitude require remedies of a nature extensive and extraordinary, beg leave to assure your honourable House, that they venerate the constitution of their fathers, that they seek for no change in the form of the government, that they know how many ages of happiness and of glory their country enjoyed under a government of king, lords, and commons, that they fervently hope that this constitution may descend to their children; but that they are fully convinced, that, unless the present evils be speedily arrested and effectually cured, a convulsion must come, in which the whole of this ancient and venerable fabric will be crumbled into dust. And your petitioners will ever pray"
Mr. M. A. Taylor
said, he had only one word to offer upon this petition, which was one of the most extraordinary and unprecedented nature. Though he had been for many years, and still was, a steady advocate for parliamentary reform, he was sure that there was scarcely one gentleman in that House who would not consider such a petition adverse, instead of being; favourable to that great cause. He was therefore particularly sorry that such a petition should have been presented at all, and especially on that evening. Those who agreed in opinion with him, could only look upon the petition as a mockery and farce. A petition containing such a mass of absurdities such a tissue of false statements, and such a farrago of inconclusive reasoning could only be offered to the House by the firm and decided enemies of parliamentary reform. It went to a direct revolution in church and state; and on that account, though he had advocated the cause of reform from year to year, though he thought that the safety of the country would be certain if it were properly carried into elect, and that that safety would be at least problematical if it were not, he would still, if he thought the advocates of reform entertained opinions similar to those entertained in this petition, turn round and say, "Away with any reform
1257
Mr. H Gurney
said, that though this petition was, in form, the petition of the county of Norfolk, it was, in point of fact, the petition of a very celebrated individual, who had lately done them the honour of becoming a Norfolk freeholder—Mr. William Cobbett.—The hon. member stated, that happening to pass at the time, he had been present at the county meeting as a spectator; that when be entered the Hall, Mr. Cobbett appeared to be speaking with the most violent gesticulations, from one end of the hustings; areverend gentleman was speaking apparently with equal energy from the other; and the under sheriff was reading from a large paper in the middle; whilst, from the unintermitted clamour of the circle that surrounded them, it appeared to him, that not one of them knew that the others were also holding forth.—The hon. member said, that he had been informed by a gentleman, who was on the hustings from the beginning, that about five hundred persons from the clubs in Norwich, had attended the meeting—about one hundred and fifty to support Mr. Cobbett, and about double the number to prevent his being heard. These opposing parties introduced themselves between the hustings and the body of freeholders in the hall—who were supposed to be five or six thousand—the most numerous and respectable assemblage he had ever witnessed; but who certainly heard not a syllable of the petition; who neither held up their hands for it, nor against it; but who, in fact, remained in total ignorance of any question having been put.—The hon. member said, that he saw Mr. Cobbett flourish a paper over his head, but had no conception, until he was told of it afterwards, that it was at that moment that his petition had been carried.
1258
Ordered to lie on the table and to be printed.
Mr. Coke
said, he had now to present from the same county, petitions of a different description to that which the House had just heard, and the subscribers to which disowned all connection with what had been called the county petition. The hon. member then presented petitions from the hundreds of Launditch, North Greenhoe, Brothercross, and North Espingham calling for a reform of parliament, complaining of agricultural distress, and declaring their disapprobation of the sentiments contained in the county petition. On moving that they be laid on the table, the hon. member expressed his anxiety to say a few words. The meeting, at which Mr. Cobbett's petition was carried, was as respectable a meeting as any that he had ever attended; and the requisition on which it was called was most respectably signed by yeomanry of the county. He had attended the meeting because he felt it to be his duty to do so,
1259
Mr. M. A. Taylor
said, that whatever quarter such a petition might come from, when it was presented to that House it could not be too strongly or too severely reprobated.
Mr. James
rose, to say, that in his opinion the county of Norfolk had clone itself high honour by agreeing to this petition. [a laugh]. He expected to be laughed at in that House for making such a declaration; but he knew that he should not be laughed at for it out of doors. If he had, wanted any proof of the honour which the county of Norfolk had done itself by supporting this, petition, he should have found, it in this singular fact—that, much as it had been scouted, laughed at, and abused, no man had yet been found who
1260
Lord C. Townshend
censured the revolutionary principles contained in the Norfolk petition.
Mr. Hume
said, that though he disapproved of the paragraphs in the petition, relating to the funds and to the equitable adjustment of contracts, he must still maintain that the property of the church was public property, intended for the support of religion; and. that if a larger portion was bestowed upon the church than was necessary, the House had a right to abridge and reduce it: He did not mean to say that the church of England had a greater share of property than was necessary to its support. What he complained of was, the manner in which that property was distributed and appropriated. There was a wide difference, however, between the church of England and the church of Ireland. In the latter country, the church had certainly more property than it ought to have; but in England, he did not believe that it had more than was wanted to maintain its clergy.
Ordered to lie on the table:
REFORM OF PARLIAMENT.]
Lord John Russell
said, that it was now his duty, after a lapse of twelve months, to renew the subject of Parliamentary Reform. Before he entered into the merits of the petitions which crowded the table of the House in favour of that measure, he would beg of the House to consider for one moment the mere number of those petitions, and the claims of the persons by whom they had been signed. In addition to the petitions presented during the last year, there was one lately sent up from the county of York, of which he might fairly say, that the like had never been laid upon the table of the How. In addition to that, petition, signed by no fewer than 17,000 freeholders of the great and populous county of York, there had been meetings in various parts of the country; and among the rest, a most numerous and important one at Edinburgh—all praying, or demanding parliamentary reform. Under these circumstances he felt how difficult it would be for him to treat a cause of such magnitude in a manner suited to its importance. He felt how still more difficult was the task, under the circumstances in which he was placed, of sustaining that cause; the advocate
1261
1262
1263
1264
bonâ fide
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
Lord Normanby
said, that in rising to second the motion, he felt some apology to be due to the House. It might have been expected from him, that he would wait until he had heard what arguments were to be opposed to the motion. There was nothing, however, which could lead him to expect any other opposition than that which might be called the stock declamation concerning the alleged wisdom of the constitution, the dangers of sudden change, and such like arguments. There was something new, however, in the condition of the opponents of reform. They must now deal with the question itself, unassisted by adventitious circumstances. They could not be told now, with any degree of plausibility, of the contagion of French principles, or the terrors of radicalism which had been often used to prejudice the fair question. Much less could they be told now, that they were asking for the people what the people did not ask for themselves. The demand for reform was now general; but the tone was moderate. The weapons of the people were the justice of their case, and the determination with which they supported it. They knew the principles of the constitution were admirable; but they were also convinced that the practice was deficient. The opposite side were in the habit of making a charge of wild theories against the advocates of reform. But the charge of theory he retorted upon those who made it. Nothing, indeed, could be more beautiful in theory, than the variety of representation said to be the result of out practical system. But, to suppose the discreet and virtuous exercise of high public functions in a body avowedly corrupt, was the very wildness of theory. He would not weary the House with instances but he could not help asking, why, in the very many questions immediately affecting the public purse, decided by very large majorities in that House, it never happened that the people participated in the advantages of those decisions? It was said, that there was indecorum in questioning its conduct, as it was easy to make charges upon public bodies. But how much easier was the task of defence in such a case; and in this now little difficulty, when the House was counsel party, and judge in the
1274
Sir Edward Hyde East,
on rising, desired, that the preamble of the Bill of Rights (Stat. 1. W. and M. s. 2, c. 2.) might be read by the clerk at the tablet which being read, recited, that "Whereas, the lords spiritual and temporal, and the commons, assembled at Westminster, lawfully, fully, and freely representing all the estates of the people of this realm, did, on the lath of February, 1688,deliver a declaration to the prince and princess of Orange," &c. He then argued, that this was an authentic and solemn
1275
1276
1277
1278
s.
1279
Mr. Ricardo
said, that the arguments of the hon. gentleman who had just sat down had been too often repeated, and
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
Mr. Martin
, of Galway, said, that the arguments in favour of parliamentary reform were reduced to this—that the House of Commons did not sympathise with the people. Now, he was persuaded that the House did sympathise with the people, as much as it ought to sympathise with them. He by no means intended to deny that a great majority of the people were for reform. Certainly, no system of reform was such a favourite with them as the radical system of such men as Cobbett. But was the House prepared to acquiesce in such preference? So far from thinking that the House did not sympathise with the people, he contended that there never was a grievance which they did not go as far as they ought to redress. Before he pledged himself to support a motion of this kind, he should like, as he entertained some doubts upon
1285
Sir J. Newport
rose to support the motion, and said, that the people of Ireland did not complain on this subject, because they had no reason, the representation of that country being as purely popular as it could be. He mentioned a conversation which he had had with the late Mr. Windham, not more than a week before the occurrence of that calamity which had terminated his valuable life. When, in answer to an apprehension which that right hon. gentleman had expressed, that the power of the Crown might be endangered by popular elections, he (sir J. N.) had adduced the example of Ireland, and asked if the Crown had not sufficient power there? That eminent man confessed that his opinion was more deeply shaken by this line of argument than by any other; because it was obvious that in that country the Crown had as much power as it ought to possess. The hon. gentleman who had just sat down seemed to throw it out as an imputation upon the sincerity of his hon. friend, that he sat in the House by virtue of a return under that system which he deprecated. He (sir J. N.) took it, on the contrary, to be as great a proof as could be given of the independence and integrity of his hon. friend's mind, that he had not hesi-
1286
Sir T. Lethbridge
said, that although his sentiments on this subject had materially changed, still he was convinced that the circumstances of the country had afforded ample grounds to justify such an alteration. He apprehended that if the motion of the noble lord were carried, it would have the necessary effect of bringing into the House, through the medium of county representation, a different class (he did not apply the term invidiously) of persons to those who now composed it. This was one ground which induced him to call for a change in the representation. He also thought, that by taking the subject into their own hands, they would discourage those absurd and visionary doctrines which were held out to the country by specious and designing characters, both in secret societies and where large multitudes were assembled out of doors. He would put an extinguisher on such actions societies; and he knew of no way so effectual for that object as by laving the question taken up in that House by men of high character. The history of this country was a continued chain of reform. The constitution contained within itself the seeds of regeneration, which had probably been the reason of its enduring for so many ages. These were partly the grounds on which to gave his vote that evening.
Sir F. Blake
said, that reform was raining ground year after year. In referring to the hon. member who had had he preamble of the Bill of Rights read it the table for the edification of the House, he would ask that hon. member if he recollected, notwithstanding the first paragraph of that bill stated the House of Commons faithfully to represent the people, what was the opinion of
1287
The House divided: Ayes, 169; Noes, 280. Majority against the motion, 111.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Allan, J. H.
Bentinck, lord W.
Althorp, visc.
Benyon, B.
Anson, hon. G.
Bernal, Ralph
Anson, Sir G.
Birch, J.
Baring, A.
Blake, sir F.
Baring, sir T.
Boughey, sir J.
Barnard, visc.
Brougham, H.
Barratt, S. M.
Browne, Dom.
Becher, W. W.
Burdett, sir F.
Benett, John
Butterworth, J.
1288
Byng, G.
Lennard, T. B.
Calcraft, J.
Lester, B.
Calcraft, J. W.
Lethbridge, sir T.
Calthorpe, hon. F.
Leycester, R.
Calvert, N.
Lloyd, sir E. P.
Campbell, hon. G. P.
Maberly, J.
Carew, R.
Maberly, W. L.
Carter, J.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Caulfield, hon. H.
Mahon, hon. S.
Cavendish, lord G.
Marjoribanks, S.
Cavendish, H.
Marryatt, J.
Chamberlayne, W.
Martin, J.
Chaloner, R.
Maxwell, John
Clifton, visc.
Milbank, M.
Coffin, Sir I.
Milton, visc.
Coke, T. W.
Monck, J. B.
Colborne, N. R.
Moore, Peter
Creevey, T.
Neville, hon. R.
Crompton, S.
Newman, R. W.
Cradock, S.
Newport, sir J.
Curwen, J. C.
Normanby, visc.
Davies, T. H.
Nugent, lord
De Crespigny, sir W.
O'Callaghan, J.
Denison, W. J.
Ord, W,
Denman, T.
Osborne, lord F. G.
Dickinson, W.
Palmer, C.
Duncannon, visc.
Palmer, C. F.
Dundas, C.
Pares, T.
Ebrington, visc.
Parnell, sir H.
Ellice, E.
Peirse, H.
Ellis, hon. G. A.
Pelham, hon. C. A.
Evans, W.
Pelham, J. C.
Farquharson, A.
Philips, G. sen.
Farrand, R.
Philips, G.
Fitzroy, lord J.
Power, R.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Powlett, hon. W.
Folkeston, visc.
Price, R.
Fitzgibbon, hon. R.
Prittie, hon. F. A.
Glenorchy, visc.
Poyntz, W. S.
Grant, J. P.
Pym, F.
Grattan, J.
Portman, E. B.
Grossest, J.
Ramsden, J. C.
Guise, sir W.
Rickford, W.
Haldimand, W.
Robarts, A.
Hamilton, lord A.
Robarts, G.
Heathcote, sir G.
Robinson, sir G.
Heathcote, G. J.
Rowley, sir W.
Heron, sir R.
Rumbold, C.
Hill, lord A.
Russell, lord G. W.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Russell, R. G.
Honywood, W. P.
Russell, W.
Hornby, E.
Scarlett, J.
Howard, lord H. M.
Scott, J.
Hume, J.
Smith, W.
Hurst, R.
Smith, J.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.
Smith, hon. R.
James, W.
Stanley, lord
Jervoise, G. P.
Stanley, hon. E.
Kennedy, T. F.
Stewart, W. (Tyrone)
Knight, R.
Stuart, lord J.
Lamb, hon. G.
Sykes, D.
Lambton, J. G.
Talbot, R. W.
Langston, J. H.
Tennyson, C.
Latouche, R.
Tierney, right hon. G.
Lawley, F.
Titchfield, marq.
Leader, W.
Townshend, lord C.
Lemon, sir W.
Tynte, C. R.
1289
Warre, J. A.
Wood, M.
Webbe, E.
Wyvill, M.
Wharton, J.
TELLERS.
Whitbread, S. C.
Russell, lord J.
Whitbread, W. H.
Ricardo, D.
White, colonel
PAIRED OFF.
Whitmore, W. W.
Lloyd, J. M.
Wilberforce, W.
Markham, admiral
Williams, J.
Tavistock, marq. of
Williams, sir R.
White, L.
Williams, W.
SHUT OUT.
Wininngton, sir T.
Kemp, T.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, April 25, 1823.
NEGOTIATIONS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.]
Lord Holland
said, he would take the present opportunity of settling a trifling difference which existed between the noble earl opposite and himself. In Feb. 1816, he had asked the noble earl, whether there was any treaty, or any stipulation in any treaty, between this country and the other powers of Europe, to prevent the union of the crowns of France and Spain on one head! The noble earl had then answered, that there was no such treaty, nor any treaty or article of a political nature which was not before parliament. In the additional papers laid before parliament, there was a despatch from Mr. Canning, dated 31st March, to sir C. Stuart, to this effect:—"The article, of which I enclose a copy, is contained in the treaty between his majesty and the king of Spain, of 1814, but has never been published. It was originally a secret article, but his majesty having declined agreeing to it as such (from the opinion that it ought to be communicated to his majesty's allies), its title was changed from that of a secret to a separate article. It formed part of the treaty communicated to the court of France, in 1814, by the duke of Wellington, then his majesty's ambassador at Paris; but it was omitted in the copy of the treaty laid before parliament, at the express desire of the French government." So that this was not a secret article, but a separate article, which was not to be made public—rather a nice distinction! but see what the article was:—"His Catholic majesty engages not to enter into any treaty or engagement with France of the nature of that known under the denomination of the Family Compact, nor any other which may affect the independence of Spain, which may be injurious to the interests of his Britannic majesty, or way be contrary
1290
The Earl of Liverpool
said, it might be easily conceived he had not had the advantage of referring to the records alluded to by the noble lord, nor had he any precise recollection of the question and answer in 1816, but he believed that the answer to which the noble lord alluded, had no reference to any question relative to the crowns of France and Spain. With regard to this separate article, it was deemed expedient at the time, in compliance with the wish of the French government, not to make it public. With respect to the term Family Compact, the meaning of it was perfectly understood; but it was certainly the bearing of all the treaties, that the crowns of France Lind Spain should not be united upon one head.
Lord Holland
asked, what was to prevent the king of Spain from succeeding, in case of certain events, by virtue of legitimate hereditary right, to the throne of France?
The Earl of Liverpool
observed, that the treaties distinctly recognized by other powers, and assented to by the legislatures both of France and Spain at the time, would prevent that event from taking place.
Lord Holland
said, the treaties were now nullified, and of no effect, and as to the recognition in France and Spain, it should be recollected that Louis 14th had expressly stated that he could not bind his successors.
The Earl of Liverpool
contended, that if such a doctrine were to prevail, no treaty whatever could be binding except
1291
APPELLATE JURISDICTION.]
The Earl of Liverpool
rose to call the attention of the House to the state of the appeals before it. He said, he intended to propose the appointment of a committee to consider the subject, and he therefore recommended to noble lords to abstain at present from the proposal of any remedy, in order that they might come to the committee without any bias on their minds. When the measure was first proposed in 1813, for hearing appeals during the whole morning three days in the week in that House—and which had been rigidly adhered to—it was expected that when the then existing arrear of appeals was got rid of, the number would be so kept down, that one day in the week would suffice for hearing them, and that his noble and learned friend on the woolsack might then be enabled to devote the other two days to the business of the Court of Chancery. So far, however, from this being the case, the number of appeals had actually increased since that period, the number lodged being 570, considerably more than the number heard and decided. Under these circumstances, it became absolutely necessary to consider of some other measure, not only with a view to facilitate the administration of justice in that House, but also to prevent the delay of justice in other courts, arising from the present mode of bearing appeals. The noble earl concluded by moving for the appointment of a committee to consider of the best means of facilitating the administration of justice in that House with regard to appeals and writs of error.
The Earl of Roseberry
expressed his thanks to the noble earl for the measure he had brought forward.
Lord Cawdor
referred to the papers laid before the House, respecting the administration of justice in Wales, and wished to know whether it was intended to found any measure upon them? He thought the subject might with propriety be referred to the said committee.
1292
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he had no intention at present of proposing any measure with reference to the subject alluded to by the noble lord. He thought it would be better not to embarrass the question, by referring to the committee the subject suggested by the noble lord.
The motion was agreed to, and a committee appointed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, April 25, 1823.
MACHINERY—PETITION OF MANCHESTER COTTON WEAVERS.]
Mr. Huskisson
presented a petition from the Cotton Weavers of Manchester, complaining of distress, and attributing it in a great measure to the employment of machinery. The right hon. gentleman expressed his dissent from the opinion of the petitioners, that the remedies suggested by them were likely to be effectual. He sympathised with their distresses; but saw no immediate means of affording them relief.
Lord Stanley
observed, that though the wages of the petitioners were undoubtedly small, it should be remembered that the price of provisions was also extremely low.
Mr. G. Philips
denied that the weavers were injured by the use of machinery, as it was applied in their trade. As far as regarded the rate of profit at present obtained, the men were in general better off than their masters.
Mr. Peel
had made a careful inquiry among those who were best qualified to give information, and had the satisfaction of saying that the wages of labour were, considering the price of provisions, such, that the weavers could afford to live in comparative comfort.
Mr. Maxwell
said, he had at one time been of opinion, that in order to equalize the advantage of labour a tax should be imposed on that description of machinery which came most directly in competition with human labour. Now, however, he had doubts as to the propriety of imposing any such tax; and would, instead of it, recommend that the taxes on the operative labourer should be reduced.
Ordered to lie on the table.
GAME LAWS.—PETITION OF RICHARD
Mr. Grey Bennet
presented the following petition:
1293
1294
l.
l.
1295
1296
1297
Sir T. Baring
bore witness to the high character of the two clerical gentlemen of whom the petitioner complained.
The Marquis of Chandos
described the petitioner as an unqualified person, who had been allowed to join in the sports of coursing along with those who were qualified, and who had been proceeded against, only because he had gone with other unqualified persons.
Mr. Sumner
said, that he thought the petition should not be allowed to be brought up [Murmurs]. His reason for saying so was, that the law had provided sufficient means of redress for the grievance complained of, through the jurisdiction of the courts.
Mr. Ellice
said, he could not understand the grounds of the hon. member's objection. The petition was most respectfully drawn up, and complained not alone of the specific injury sustained by the petitioner, but also of the operation of the laws under which he had suffered.
Mr. Wynn
said, that if the petition had been confined to a complaint against the conduct of the magistrates, for which there was a remedy given to the petitioner by appeal, under the statute, to the quarter sessions, undoubtedly the practice of the House would warrant an opposition to its being brought up. But, as it also prayed for an alteration of the laws, it ought to be received.
Mr. John Williams
considered the denial to follow game on a man's own grounds a grievance to the people of this country, and a manifest invasion of the rights of property. He trusted the whole of the Game laws would undergo a complete revision.
Mr. Hume
stated it as his belief, that there was not another man in the country, who, being a judge in his own cause, would have acted as the duke of Buckingham had acted. The petition was another proof of the impropriety of placing clergymen in the commission of the peace. In one or two of the counties of England it was a very wise proceeding of the lord lieutenants not to recommend clergymen to the magisterial office, and the result was, that those counties were free from those broils and disagreements, which existed where the practice was different.
Mr. S. Wortley
and colonel
Wodehouse
1298
Ordered to lie on the table.
PENITENTIARY AT MILBANK.]
Mr. Grey Bennet
after a few observations on the extraordinary diminution that had been made in the quantity of food apportioned to the prisoners in the Penitentiary at Milbank, and on the evil effects of straitened diet, in producing premature mortality, amongst the prisoners, moved, "That there be laid before the House, a copy of letter dated March 1822, from Mr. Hutchison, to the committee of the general Penitentiary, on the subject of dietary:—of Report of the 2nd January 1823, on Mary Brenton's death:—of Report, in January 1823, on the state of the prison:—and, of Letters of the 8th and 19th of April."
Mr. Holford
vindicated the conduct of the committee, and stated the readiness with which they had applied to proper medical persons, as soon as doubts had been entertained respecting the nature of the disease with which the prisoners were afflicted.
Sir J. Yorke
complained of the dismissal of Mr. Hutchison, the medical attendant of the establishment.
Mr. W. Courtenay
said, that that gentleman's dismissal had been occasioned not by any opinion of his want of skill, but by the want of temper which he had displayed in his communications with the committee.
Mr. Secretary Peel
deprecated any imputation upon the conduct of the committee, to whose gratuitous exertions the public were highly indebted. With respect to the dismissal of Mr. Hutchinson, it met with his decided approbation.
Alderman Wood
expressed his opinion, that the swampy nature of the ground on which the Penitentiary was built was one great cause of the mortality that prevailed in it.
Mr. Peel
said, that the medical men did not attribute the disease to the situation on which the prison was built.
The motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS
Monday, April 28, 1823.
MILITARY AND NAVAL PENSIONS BILL.]
On the order of the day for the third reading,
Lord King
said, that a more foolish
1299
Lord Bexley
said, he had no objection to the noble lord's practical joke against the bill, as it was a proof that no substantial argument could be urged against it. He contended; that the bill was both equitable and expedient. Together with the burthens imposed upon posterity by the bill, would be bequeathed a peace founded on the acknowledged ascendancy of the British arms and councils, He contended, that the arrangement with the Bank was made with a due reference to the advantage of the public. The Bank undoubtedly took the chance of events; and he would ask noble lords opposite whether there was such a certainty of the continuance of peace, as to make this undoubtedly a good bargain for the Bank?
Lord Ellenborough
thought the Bank had overreached ministers in this transaction. The noble lord who spoke last, had expressed his hope, that the peace,
1300
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that the real question was, whether the terms were such as the government ought to have made; and on that point he would observe, that they were the same as had been offered by government in the last year, and the noble lords opposite would allow that the continuance of peace was as likely then as now. On an average of years, it appeared that 4 per cent was the fair rate of interest. He contended, therefore, that the arrangement was a perfectly equitable one.
The Marquis of Lansdown
contended, that this was a measure which could not be advantageous to both parties, unless the government were prepared to show that they had overreached the Bank, it could not be advantageous to the public. The
gravamen
The amendment was negatived, and the bill passed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, April 28, 1823.
PETITION OF GEORGE WHITE.]
Mr. Hume
presented a petition from a surveyor of taxes, named White, complaining that he had been dismissed, without due cause, from his situation. Mr. White, the hon. gentleman said, had been a public servant 29 years; nine years as a confidential messenger to the late Mr. Pitt, and the rest of the time as a collector of taxes. He was now, without having committed any offence, and merely upon the strength of an anonymous letter, written to the Board of Taxes against him, deprived of his office, and consequently of his livelihood, This sentence of the board had been confirmed by the Treasury; no opportunity being afforded to him of making his defence. The truth was, that Mr. White had made himself unpopular by detecting certain frauds in the collection of the land-tax, which had, taken place within his division. The ex-
1301
Mr. Lushington
said, that the credulity of the hon. member had been grossly imposed upon. The petitioner had been dismissed upon the fullest inquiry, with means of defence allowed him, and in despite of a feeling entertained in his favour, on account of his long services. The offence which had made his dismissal necessary, was this: being himself a surveyor of taxes, he had made a return contrary to law, as to the windows of the house which he occupied.
Mr. Hume
said, he was prepared to meet the whole complaint against the petitioner. The act which had been construed into a fraudulent return, was only the stopping up some windows in his house with wood-work instead of filling them with brick. This was not an offence to dismiss a man for after 29 years' service. The real offence was the petitioner's having exposed certain frauds.
Ordered to lie on the table.
NEGOTIATIONS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.]
Mr. Macdonald
rose to make his promised motion. He began by saying, that no one, he apprehended, could entertain an expectation, or desire that communications of such momentous importance as those which had lately been laid, by his majesty's command, before both Houses of Parliament, and which had by this time found their way, as he hoped, into the hands of all his majesty's subjects, and which, if he mistook not, contained matter which would make them cling with redoubled zeal to those principles which they had previously avowed—no person, he thought, could desire that such papers should remain longer on the table of that House, unnoticed and unacknowledged. It might be well that they had not proceeded until the warmth of public feeling had in some degree abated; it might be well that they had delayed the expression of their opinion until they had recovered from the impression of their first feelings on reading matters from which their hearts so totally revolted—feelings of surprise and disgust which could never be entirely removed, though the papers were
1302
1303
Tros Tyriusve
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
Parturient montes.
1309
1310
1311
1312
casus fœderis
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
persiflage
1326
1327
"Multi
Committunt eadem diverse crimina fato;
Ille crucem pretium sceleris tulit, hic diadema."
1328
Mr. Stuart Wortley
said, it was, his intention, before he submitted to the House an amendment to the motion of the hon. gentleman, to state, as briefly as possible, his view of the subject. In doing so, he would brig back the House to the true question; namely, whether they did or did not approve of the conduct of his majesty's ministers, in the course they had taken during the recent negotiations, after they had determined that this country should remain neutral. His feelings were totally different from those of the hon. gentleman; and he felt confident that the feelings which he entertained were in unison with those of the country at large. He should be ashamed, holding the opinions which he did, if he were not ready, in the very first instance, to call on the House to exercise their unbiassed judgment on the question. With respect to all that the hon. gentleman had said regarding the general conduct of the other powers towards Spain, and particularly of France herself, he believed that very little difference of opinion would be found to prevail. For himself, he felt as strongly as the hon. gentleman could do, that the conduct of those sovereigns, for the last two or three years, struck at all the principles on which our own constitution was founded, and was an attempt to shut the door against the admission into any state of any thing like rational liberty And, further, he would say, that with regard to the conduct of France, it seemed to him to be perfectly incomprehensible. In his opinion, the French government had manifested a degree of folly, greater than had ever been exhibited by any other government on the face of the earth. He was convinced, however, that those who guided her councils would be stopped in their career, and that the infamy of their acts would recoil on their own heads. He believed the efforts of France would fail; and, therefore, what the hon. mover had said with respect to the danger to be apprehended from the possession of Spain by France, appeared to him to be totally visionary and unfounded. With respect to the conduct of the duke of Wellington at Verona, he would contend, that unless when his majesty's government entered into remonstrances, they were determined and prepared to back those remonstrances by force, they would—to,
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
Mr. Thomas Wilson
said, that he rose with pleasure to second the amendment, concurring as he did in all that had fallen from the hon. member for Yorkshire, and more particularly in that part of it respecting the conduct of ministers in their prompt and steady decision upon the line of conduct which they had pursued in the course of these negotiations. He was sure that in these sentiments he represented the feeling of a great body of his constituents, and he was sure also that it was their desire, as it was his, that his majesty's government should persevere in their adherence to the principles of honest neutrality, and to a spirit of conciliation both towards Spain and France. He, therefore, strongly recommended to his majesty's government, to persevere in the course which they had begun, and, to pursue, in a spirit of conciliation, the means best adapted for maintaining the blessings of peace. By the adoption of such a course, they would keep themselves in that situation which was most likely to afford them the ultimate means of assisting either of the parties, and enabling them to escape from the perilous situation in which they, at present, stood. To expect that such a mass of papers would give universal satisfaction would be unreasonable; but, he had no hesitation in saying, when he looked at them as a whole, that he thought they proved that ministers had done every thing which honour, firmness, and consistency of character required from them, and that they deserved the thanks of the people. He had listened with attention to the speech of the hon. mover of the address, and he must say, that his sentiments in favour of neutrality had not been at all weakened by the arguments of the hon. gentleman. The hon. member had, indeed, strenuously contended, that his majesty's government had
1334
1335
Mr. Hobhouse
said, he could not refrain from the expression of his feelings, in unison with those of every man who felt as an Englishman, in condemnation of what he conceived to be the gross failure of the negotiations, and the consequent degradation to which this country had been reduced by the measures adopted by the right hon. secretary opposite, and his colleagues in office. And, when he expressed those feelings, he begged at the same time to congratulate the House upon the tone and temper of the speeches which had been delivered both by the hon. mover and the seconder of the amendment. Here, at least, they had the consolation of not hearing language fostered by British hearts tainted by the base principles of foreign despots—language unfit to be heard by British ears, and in direct variance with every principle and feeling of which an Englishman ought tobe proud. Such language, he grieved to say, had been uttered elsewhere, in a place to which he could not, consistently with parliamentary order, more particularly allude, which it would have been better to have uttered among the despots at Verona, when sealing the destiny of freemen, than to have reserved for utterance in a British parliament. It was but justice to the hon. mover and seconder of the amendment to say, that they had not followed the offensive example which he had deprecated. They at least had saved themselves from the odium of such language; and had avowed the self same principles which he and those with whom he acted had declared. The only difference was, that they failed in arriving at the same conclusion. With this difference, they agreed upon terms. They had spoken out like Englishmen, in reprobation of despotism and injustice. Still, it was singular, that the very proper language of his hon. friend, who moved the original address, had been censured by the hon. member who spoke last, and more particularly after the language which he had applied to the outrage of France against Spain. The hon. member had properly said, that it deserved the "greatest execration." The hon. member could not, by possibility, have used an epithet better designating the feeling of every honest bosom at the invasion of Spain. And if, as it ought to be, it was followed up with the vote which
1336
1337
1338
De non apparentibus et de non existentibus eadem est ratio.
she
1339
en aquel sentido mediador
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
1348
1349
1350
Sir W. De Crespigny
declared himself an advocate for a strict neutrality. Nobody could detest the conduct of France with regard to Spain more than he did; but, he also thought it his duty to consider, first of all, the honour and safety of his own country [coughing]. If the member, who appeared so afflicted with a cold, imagined that he was to be deterred from stating his sentiments, he was very much mistaken. That hon. member had better go home and nurse himself. He could not see why this country, which had spent six hundred millions to set the Bourbons up, should now spend as much more to pull them down again. He felt it his duty to protest against the principle of making England a party to every war which occurred, for which she was always addled with the expense and had to pay the piper. He should oppose any measure likely to embroil us in another war.
Mr. Bankes
said, he had listened with great attention to ascertain, if possible, from the hon. mover and those who supported him, whether they wished the House to consider the passage of the French army into Spain as a good cause of war on our parts against France. He
1351
1352
Mr. Baring
said, that if any attempt had been made at catching a few extra votes, it had not been on his (the Opposition) side of the House, but on the side over the way, where it was maintained, that the only question before them, was one of peace or war. He asserted, that no such decision was involved in an assent to the address of his hon. friend; and he was further prepared to maintain, that this country was more exposed to the probable chances of war, by the course which his majesty's government had pursued, than it could have been by the adoption of a tone of firm and vigorous remonstrance, from the beginning. What was the situation of this country, with reference to her continental allies? We had now been joined with them for some seven or eight years in treaties which had for their bases the general pacification of Europe. So far he was not disposed to object to the alliance; for we had, in fact, by our union with them, delivered Europe
1353
1354
1355
1356
Lord Francis Leveson Gower
said:—Sir, upon an occasion like the present, which naturally calls forth the talent and the eloquence of the most experienced members of this House, I feel that I owe it some apology for obtruding upon its attention a voice which I am fully conscious can have no real influence upon the result of its discussions. Fortuitous circumstances have induced me to take much interest in the affairs of Spain; and the House will perhaps indulge me so far as to allow that it is not unnatural, though it may be presumptuous in me, to wish to hazard the expression of my opinion this night. I shall give, Sir, my zealous vote against the motion of my hon. friend and relative who has proposed the original address to his majesty. I shall not attempt to defend that vole, however, by discussing the wide range of topics which have been necessarily dwelt open by that hon. gentleman; I shall not presume to expatiate on that extended circle which must be trodden by mightier spirits than myself. There is one point which has, to a certain extent, afforded a theme for de-
1357
1358
1359
1360
1361
Mr. Wilberforce
entreated the House to consider well the circumstances in which ministers had been placed, and the influence which those circumstances must necessarily have had upon their conduct during the late negotiations. He approved of the manly tone and the plainness of language which had been used in the present debate. Such language not only became the representatives of a free people, but was of manifest advantage, considering the moral jurisdiction which the debates of that House exercised over the public mind. No language could be too strong to apply to those principles which had been avowed by France in support of her unjustifiable aggression on Spain; because they were principles which would have the effect of repressing that rising liberty which the nations of the world at present enjoyed. The conduct of France with respect to the unfortunate Spaniards was marked by singular duplicity. When her attention was called to the affairs of Naples, not a word was said about Spain which could lead to a suspicion that France meditated an attack on that country. But, having thrown off the mask, his majesty's ministers had thought it right to step forward; and he must say, that on looking through the various papers before the House, it appeared to him that they had manifested a sincere and consistent desire to preserve the peace of Europe, and to prevent the unjust aggression against Spain. He could, indeed, have wished to have seen a higher moral tone preserved in those papers. His majesty's ministers seemed to him to have fallen into a mistake which was not un-
1362
1363
1364
Mr. H. Sumner
said, he was perfectly satisfied with the line of strict neutrality which was laid down in the papers of the late lord Londonderry, and explained by him to the members of the holy alliance—that line which was perfectly consistent with the interests and honour of the country; and for the observance of which, in perfect sincerity during the late negotiations, he would give his majesty's ministers his warmest vote. It had been said, that ultimately we must be dragged into the war. If so, then he said, the later that event should happen the better. The danger which had been apprehended from the successes of France in Spain, and her placing an army of observation upon the Portuguese frontier, as she had done on that of Spain. seemed perfectly unfounded; because France knew that Portugal was under the protection of this country. Many other topics occurred to him to which he did not, at that late hour, propose to call the attention of the House; but he thought he should not have discharged his duty, if he had not expressed his satisfaction at the whole of the conduct of his majesty's ministers. He therefore gave the amendment his most cordial support.
Mr. Peter Moore
then rose amidst loud cries of "Question," "Adjourn," "Go on," from every part of the House, and said, that considering the intense interest
1365
The motion was agreed to, and the debate was adjourned till to-morrow.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, April 29, 1823.
NEGOTIATIONS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.]
On the order of the day, for resuming the adjourned debate, upon Mr. Stuart Wortley's amendment to Mr. Macdonald's motion respecting the Negotiations relative to Spain.
Mr. W. Whitmore
rose. He said, he wished briefly to explain the motives which would induce him to vote for the original address. In stating those reasons he should not say that it was the policy of this country to embark in war; still less that it was her policy to hold out a menace which it was not her intention to follow up. His decision was not founded on either of these considerations, but it was founded on the fact, that throughout the whole of the documents which had been submitted to parliament, he was unable to discover a single proof of that sound, open, manly, and independent feeling, which it became this country to express, at the atrocious aggression contemplated by France against the freedom; of the Spanish nation. It was not his intention to go through the details of that correspondence, but, looking at it as a whole, he must say, that the right hon. secretary and his colleagues appeared, with respect to France and Spain, not in the character of neutrals, but, unfortunately, as the allies, or, at least, the apologists of France. Wherever a wrong was committed by that government, the British ministry was certain to find an excuse for them. We furnished them with explanations which they themselves never contemplated. What, for instance, was the necessity of our plenipotentiary at Verona admitting that the conduct of the Spanish government might have endangered the safety of other countries, and might have excited the uneasiness of the governments whose members he was addressing? Now, all that might have been very true; but he did not see why an English plenipotentiary should insert it in a memorandum addressed to the sovereigns assembled at Verona. Still some
1366
1367
1368
casus fœderis,
1369
Mr. Disbrowe
contended, that the language of the British diplomatists during the late negotiations had been throughout consistent with the end which the British ministry had in view. In a confidential note from the pen of the late marquis of Londonderry, which did honour both to his heart and head, the policy of this country was distinctly laid down to be that of non-interference. At the congress of Verona the duke of Wellington was instructed to declare, that come what might, this country would not be a party to any interference with Spain. Nothing could be more intelligible than this language, and nothing stronger could, he thought, be required of us. If we refused interference on one side, how could those who justified our doing so contend that we ought to interfere on the other? We had remonstrated: beyond remonstrance nothing remained for us but to menace; and if we were not prepared to back our menace by war, how could it be contended that we ought to have assumed a dictatorial tone? The hon. member for Westminster was the only one as yet, who had advocated war; but if they were to make war on an abstract principle, he should wish to ask what that principle was? If, as the ally of Spain, he should wish to ask, of which part of Spain; for it was admitted that she was agitated by internal divisions. He did not, however, believe that Spain was divided in the manner that she had been represented to be by an hon. member; namely, that all the intellect and worth of the nation was on one side, and all the fools and bigots and knaves on the other: and in support of this opinion, he could adduce the authority of count Torreno, one of the greatest liberals in Spain, who had avowed that his own party was the smallest but that they made up in activity what they wanted in numbers. The hon. member concluded by declaring that he must disclaim all interference on our part as equally useless, impolitic, and unjust.
Captain Maberly
said, he was one of those who felt considerable dissatisfaction at the whole tone and character of these negotiations. He considered that both in the manner in which they commenced, in the conclusion in which they terminated, they were wholly incompatible with the honour, the dignity, and the policy of this country, and had more deeply committed our eventual interests, than those who conducted them had any concep-
1370
1371
sine qua non
sine qua non
1372
cmigrés,
1373
Mr. Curwen
said, that he, and every one of his hon. friends near him, who had, for many years past been calling the attention of the House to the distressed state of the country, must feel what a dreadful responsibility ministers would have incurred, if they had involved Great Britain at this moment in a state of warfare. What he asked, would have been the feelings of gentlemen around him—what would have been the expression of Sentiment throughout the country—if mi-
1374
Mr. Hobhouse,
in explanation, denied having said, that the majority of his constituents were desirous that the country should now go to war. What he had said was, that if his majesty's government had entered a strong protest against the proceedings of France at the congress at Verona, and in consequence of that protest had been obliged to go to war, the majority of his constituents would readily submit to any privations to which such a course of policy might have led; but he had qualified that assertion by adding, that it must be clearly understood that it was a war for the liberties of Europe—that it was a war of the' people of Europe against the kings of Europe.
Mr. Robertson
said, he was most desi-
1375
1376
1377
Mr. John Williams
expressed his surprise, that none of his majesty's ministers had yet addressed the House on this question, but said, that he supposed, from the cheers with which they had received the speech of the hon. member for Cumberland, that they remained satisfied with that hon. gentleman's arguments. The question on which the House were called upon, to decide appeared to be reduced to a comparatively small compass. At least this was certain, that from the commencement of the debates on this subject, from the evening when the right hon. the secretary of state for foreign affairs, in all the forms of oratory, and with some of the ceremonies of religion, deprecated the success of the French in their invasion of Spain, down to the present moment, there had been but one consentient opinion, and he was proud to say it, as to the nature, quality, and character of the enterprise undertaken by France against the Spanish people. Every hon. gentleman from first to last, had spoken of that enterprise in a tone and in language befitting an English House of Commons. It was acknowledged by all, that the conduct of France was in every respect calculated to excite odium, and provoke execration; that it united in itself all that was detestable in hypocrisy, and all that was disgusting in violence. That being the case, it seemed to follow as a matter of course, that at least a stronger tone of remonstrance—one more suitable to the gross injustice and flagrant atrocity of the case—might have been resorted to by his majesty's ministers; and that if such a tone could with prudence, have been adopted, the occasion was one which fully required it. The only question, then, which remained behind, was the question of prudence. For, notwithstanding the cheers with which the hon. gentlemen opposite re-
1378
1379
1380
1381
in extenso,
1382
1383
1384
1385
1386
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that when, in an earlier stage of these proceedings, an hon. and learned member, on the opposite benches, had stated, that in the course of these negotiations his majesty's ministers were acting under a most awful responsibility, he had most aptly described the true situation in which they were placed; for it was impossible that they could shut out from their recollection, that we had but just concluded a long, an arduous, and a most expensive contest for the preservation, not only of our own liberties, but of those of Europe. Under such circumstances, it was impossible that his majesty's ministers could contemplate even the possibility of the renewal of war, without feelings of the greatest anxiety and pain. And, when it was stated that war was likely to be renewed upon a subject involving questions of the most serious and important nature, affecting as it did not only the rights of nations and the freedom and independence of states, but also the particular interests of this country; and when it was further considered, that war, if renewed at all in Europe, was likely to affect a power with which we were in close and ancient alliance, a nation to protect which we had fought and expended much blood and treasure, then he maintained, that his majesty's ministers had, during these negociations, been acting under a greater degree of responsibility than perhaps any other government, upon any other occasion, had acted under. His majesty's ministers well knew that this was a question which was calculated to
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
Mr. Hobhouse.
—I said that all the great powers of the continent were enemies to freedom.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
proceeded. He did not object to the correction of the hon. member: but if those great powers were adverse to the extension of freedom—an ignoble feeling, and one which he did not mean to defend—still if we had to deal with powers, who, from the nature of things, entertained adverse opinions, it became our duty to shape our arguments in a manner the best calculated to carry persuasion and conviction with them. Nothing could be gained by invective; while, on the contrary, much might be done by pointing bit the danger likely to arise from any attempts to repress that natural liberty which he firmly believed, must, in spite Of all efforts to the contrary, take place in the natural course of things, and in consequence of the great increase of general knowledge. His object was simply
1392
1393
1394
1395
1396
1397
1398
1399
Sir James Mackintosh
said, he had never; on any former occasion when he had addressed that House, felt that he stood more in need of its indulgence than he did at present, because never before had he addressed it on so important a subject. Although he was by no means satisfied
1400
"I should be much for open war, O Peers!
As not behind in hate; what was urged
Main reason to persuade immediate war,
Did not dissuade me most, and seem to cast
Ominous conjecture on the whole success:
When he who most excels in feat of arms,
In what he counsels and in what excels
Mistrustful, grounds his courage on despair."
1401
"But Horace, Sir, was delicate, was nice;
Bubo observes, he lash'd no sort of vice;
1402
Horace would say, sir Billy serv'd the crown,
Blunt could do bus'ness, Higgins knew the town;
In Sappho touch the failings of the sex,
In rev'rend Bishops note some small neglects."
1403
1404
1405
1406
1407
"fuit hœc sapientia quondanm,"
1408
1409
1410
1411
1412
1413
1414
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that as he was a member of that administration against which a severe criminatory resolution had been moved, he stood before the House
1415
1416
1417
l.
1418
casus fœderis
1419
1420
1421
1422
1423
1424
Mr. Hohhouse
disclaimed any such confession. His authority was derived from much higher sources.
Mr. Peel.
—The hon. member had confessed, that the opinion of the different persons attached to the different embassies at Verona, founded on the principles which had been maintained during the negotiations, was, that his right hon. friend (Mr. Canning) was a complete radical. Since that time, however, he had been blamed by the were ardent partisans of liberty, for having rather fallen short than gone beyond what they considered his public duty. The hon. member fob Westminster had last night observed, that though there could be a thousand curves, there could only be one straight line. Now, by this straight line he thought that his right hon, friend had been fortunate enough to direct his conduct; for, if it had the reprobation of Siberian aides-de-camp on the one hand, and of the warm friends
1425
1426
Sir Francis Burdett
said, he could not but express his satisfaction at the unanimity of sentiment which prevailed in the House with regard to the conduct of France towards Spain; for though he certainly anticipated much of what he had heard on his own side of the House, he was not prepared for that universal expression of the sentiment which had taken place; and, whatever the vote of that House might be, there could be no doubt entertained in Europe of the feeling which universally prevailed, and the light in which the conduct of France towards Spain was viewed in this country. He agreed with the right hon. gentleman who had just sat down, that the House ought not to descend to verbal criticism on the papers which had been produced, but should look to their tone
1427
in limine,
1428
1429
'That roars so loud, and thunders in the index.'
"Quid dignurn tanto ferret hic promissor hiatu?"
1430
1431
1432
cordon sanitaire!
1433
1434
1435
suaviter in modo
1436
Mr. Wynn
rose amidst cries of "question" from all parts of the House. The hon. member said that he had proposed to address the House; but finding hon. gentlemen so impatient, he should move an adjournment of the debate.
Mr. Brougham
said, that much as he disapproved of the motion of adjournment, he knew well that a motion of this sort was sure never to fail, as the member who proposed it could enforce division after division. If the house would receive an opinion gathered from experience, they would adjourn at once, instead of taking the trouble of dividing two or three times, only protesting, as he did, against the motion.
Mr. Wynn
said, that he had moved the
1437
Mr. Brougham
said, that having been the cause of the hon. gentleman withdrawing his motion, he thought himself bound in candour to say, that he would now support the motion for an adjournment.
Mr. Littleton
thought that it would ill become the House to allow the debate to go on when so much impatience was expressed by hon. members. He would therefore move, that the debate be adjourned till to-morrow.
The motion was agreed to, and at half after one o'clock the House adjourned.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, April 30, 1823.
PUNISHMENT BY WHIPPING.]
Mr. Grey Bennet
rose, in pursuance of notice, to move for leave to bring in a bill to abolish Punishment by Whipping. He maintained, that this species of punishment was altogether inefficacious, and that it wanted two essential qualities which ought to belong to all penal inflictions. It neither operated as an example to deter others, nor had it any tendency to reform the offender. It was, in fact, the last relic of a barbarous system of punishments which it was high time to get rid of. He was ready to admit the necessity of some punishment for minor offences, and if there were no other which could be effectually substituted for that of whipping, he would not have brought forward the present motion. There was, however, a most effectual punishment, that of hard labour, which, while it operated with sufficient severity on the offender, neither degraded nor disgraced him, like the punishment of flogging, and which might have the effect of convincing him of the necessity of habits of industry. Not long since, the punishment by pillory had been repealed, and the abolition of flogging, as applied to females, had been carried almost by acclamation. It was a ready sacrifice to the good sense and good feeling of the country. The hon. gentleman challenged any man to produce an instance in which
1438
Mr. Curwen
seconded the motion.
Alderman C. Smith
maintained the expediency of whipping, and observed that there were many offenders who would rather be imprisoned twelve months, than undergo that salutary infliction.
The Attorney General
said, he was aware that any person who opposed such a measure as that which the hon. member had brought forward, would subject himself to the charge of want of humanity. He felt it his duty, however, to oppose the motion, because he was satisfied that the punishment of whipping was, in many cases, salutary, and that a sweeping abolition of it could not but be highly prejudicial. It might be advisable to do away; with this punishment in some particular cases; but to abolish it altogether would: be a very dangerous experiment. He should oppose the measure in this early stage of it, because, if the hon. member succeeded in obtaining leave to bring in the bill, magistrates might feel themselves fettered in the exercise of the power of awarding this punishment, before the bill was disposed of.
1439
Mr. Lennard
observed, that the principle had been admitted in the abolition of the practice of whipping females, and he saw every reason for carrying it further. It was a punishment that must have different effects upon different minds, and might be slight or severe, according to the pleasure of the person inflicting it.
Mr. Dawson
saw no sufficient ground for the motion, and, if necessary, would take the sense of the House upon it. Without whipping, magistrates would not be able to compel subordination and discipline in prisons.
Mr. Hobhouse
denied that there was any statute by which magistrates were authorized to flog for the purpose of keeping up the discipline of prisons. Whipping was the sentence of a court; and, he believed, could not be inflicted without it. As to the private infliction of whipping, though it might be rendered less disgusting by that means, one of the great objects of punishment was the publicity of the example, and if we must have flogging, he should prefer the public to the private infliction of the punishment flogging in private was in fact a species of torture which the spirit of the English law did not justify. The more he considered the subject, the more he was convinced of the necessity of extending the provisions of the late act, which abolished flogging in respect to female offenders. If the house had judged it necessary to respect the decency of females, he did not see why they should not also respect the manliness of the other sex by abolishing this degrading punishment. A man once punished in this way lost all self respect. The frequent infliction of this punishment had tended greatly to degrade the character of our seamen; and our navy was well known to be supplied by a class of men, upon whose moral character and habits little reliance could be placed. He himself knew an instance of a commander of a ship, who was obliged to sleep every night with sentinels planted at the door of his cabin with loaded blunderbusses, and who assigned as a reason for the precaution, that his life was hi jeopardy, secant; that there was not a man on board his ship who had not been flogged. He trusted the House would see the necessity of abolishing a punishment, which was contrary to sound principles of penal legislation, as well as to common decency and humanity.
Mr. N. Calvert
thought the punishment
1440
Mr. S. Bourne
agreed that the punishment of whipping, in order to be salutary, ought to be public; but objected decidedly to the total discontinuance of it. He thought that, in the case of a hardened offender it was often attended with most beneficial effects.
Mr. J. Smith
approved of the principle of the motion. One argument had not been adverted to, which might be urged in support of the abolition. He alluded to the improved state of knowledge among the inferior classes of the people. As to flogging in public schools, it was much less frequently resorted to than it used to be.
Mr. Sumner
thought the introduction of the tread-mill would render the punishment of whipping in prisons less necessary. If the hon. member brought in his bill, he would recommend an exception with respect to juvenile offenders, to whose case the punishment of whipping was peculiarly adapted.
Sir I. Coffin
declared that, in the whole course of his naval experience, he had never heard of such a case as that mentioned by the hon. member for Westminster. He thought it impossible that the story could be well-founded. He had himself commanded the Melampus, during the late war, for fourteen months, and during the whole of' that period he had punished only one man.
Sir R. Heron
thought it was high time to abolish so degrading and unequal a punishment.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that all the information he had been able to collect on this subject led him to think that the abolition of the punishment of whipping for minor offences would be a dangerous experiment. If the principle of the hon. mover were well-founded, they ought not to stop here; but the punishment of flogging in public schools ought to be abolished by act of parliament. It was peculiarly incumbent upon those who advocated the necessity of mitigating the severity of the penal code, in respect to capital punishments, to beware of render-
1441
Dr. Lushinglon
denied that the practice of flogging was necessary to discipline, either in our army or navy. He was convinced that where soldiers or sailors were subjected to it, their feelings became blunted, and their moral characters degenerated in proportion. The flogging at public schools proceeded upon a different principle; but there were instances in which, at public schools, the practice had been carried to a most improper excess. He objected to public whipping; it was a disgusting exhibition. And, in cases where floggings were privately inflicted, who was to superintend the punishment? The fact was, that its lightness or severity depended, almost entirely, upon the feeling or caprice of the gaoler.
Mr. Alderman Wood
said, that in the gaol of Newgate, the punishment was always inflicted under the inspection of the sheriff or of a visiting magistrate.
Mr. Home Drummond
thought it impossible that the narrative of the hon member for Westminster could be correct. It could hardly have occurred without being noticed at the Admiralty.
Sir T. Baring
thought that boys might be whipped with less impropriety than men; and that though the punishment might tend to reclaim young delinquents it had no such effect on old ones.
Mr. Martin
of Galway, thought there were cases in which the continuance of this punishment might be desirable, although he thought the manner of inflicting it deserved to be inquired into.
1442
Mr. Estcourt
thought, that, as the whole end of punishment was the deterring of others from crime, and as there could be no doubt that such was the tendency of the punishment of flogging, it ought not to be abolished. In the present state of prison discipline it was indispensable.
After a short reply from Mr. Bennet, the House divided: Ayes, 37. Noes, 70.
List of the Minority.
Baring, sir T.
Maberly, J.
Bernal, Ralph
Maberly, W. L.
Brougham, H.
Monck, J. B.
Blake, sir F.
Milbank, M.
Byng, G.
Martin, R.
Caulfield, hon. H.
Newport, sir J.
Corbett, P.
Ricardo, D.
Cradock, col.
Robinson, sir G.
Curwen, J. C.
Rice, T. S.
Denman, T.
Smith, J.
Fergusson, sir R.
Smith, R.
Folkeston, lord
Talbot, R. W.
Grant, J. P.
Tulck, C. A.
Hume, J.
Wood, alderman
Hornby, E.
Williams, O.
Hutchinson, hon. H.
Williams, O. jun.
Kemp, J.
Wodehouse, E.
Lushington, S.
TELLERS.
Leycester, R.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Lemiard, T. B.
Hobhouse, J. C.
NEGOTIATIONS RELATIVE TO SPAIN.]
The order of the day being read for resuming the adjourned debate upon Mr. Macdonald's Motion respecting the Negotiations relative to Spain, the original motion and also, the Amendment proposed by Mr. Stuart Wortley were read by the Speaker. After which,
Mr. Wynn
rose. He began by stating, that after the most serious consideration of the important subject which had for two nights occupied the attention of the House, he was firmly convinced that no other measures than those which had been adopted by his majesty's ministers would have been consistent with the interests of the country. He could not discover any intermediate course which they could have taken between war and the neutrality they had preserved. He was aware that it had been suggested by the hon. member for Westminster on the first evening of the debate, that our minister at Verona ought to have told France that if she still persisted in her unjust intention of attacking Spain, he would go home and submit the subject to a British parliament. Now, he must contend, that if any minister had done so, he would have thereby degraded himself, and have acted contrary
1443
1444
1445
1446
1447
Mr. Hobhouse
said, that his observations were intended to apply to the monarchical principle, as expounded by the tyrants of the continent.
Mr. Wynn
said, he understood the observation of the hon. gentleman to have extended further. But, upon the same principle, he could not see the necessity or propriety of interfering with the policy of other states, neither could he perceive the justice of animadverting with asperity on the conduct of foreign potentates. In that House, he knew, gentlemen might indulge in whatever language they pleased, relative to foreign sovereigns; it was,
1448
1449
Mr. Leycester
said, he rose for the purpose of repelling the supposition, that the question before the House was, whether there should be peace or war? The question for consideration was the real nature and true character of the late negotiations. He disapproved of the whole course which had been adopted by his majesty's ministers. Why had not the opinion of this country been supported by an effective remonstrance? That such a remonstrance should have been made, they had the authority of ministers themselves. He had looked over the papers with the utmost anxiety, but could find no instruction with respect to the conduct of France, which went further than "To hint a fault, and hesitate dislike." His hon. friend, the member for Surrey, had stated his conviction, that even if the language of his majesty's ministers had been more forcible, war would not have been avoided. Now, his own view of the case was exactly the reverse. Had ministers used forcible language, the French government would not, he believed, have ventured on war. The French had, if he mistook not, some very unpleasant reminiscences of their recent struggles with this country, which would have induced them to pause, if strong language—language such as the aggression warranted—had been used. Had not that House, with one voice, proclaimed the infamy and atrocity of the attack upon Spain? Had not a noble lord (F. Gower), who was friendly to ministers, described the insane conduct of the French government as similar to that of the herd of swine mentioned in scripture, which being possessed with an evil spirit rushed on its own destruction? The proceedings of France, had on all hands been admitted to have been flagrantly unjust. In another place, indeed, he understood, that, by one individual, sentiments of a different kind had been uttered. He could scarcely believe the report. He could scarcely believe that any Englishman could be found capable of expressing the opinions ascribed to the individual to whom he alluded:—
"Who but must laugh, if such a man there be?
"Who would not weep, if the great duke were he?"
1450
Mr. William Williams
defended the right of the people of Europe to re-model their governments on the representative system. He could see no danger from their doing so; and he never expected to have heard a contrary sentiment expressed in a British House of Commons. He thought that every man who loved the British constitution ought to rejoice when he saw other nations adopting the principles on which that constitution was founded, and establishing a system of representative government. He believed, that prior to the conference at Verona, this country was pledged to oppose the political views which were there disclosed by the allied monarchs. When he looked at the general conduct of his majesty's government at Verona, he could not help declaring his approbation of their line of policy, although in some of the particulars he did not go along with them. He was not one of those who thought that the use of menaces would have become England, during her negotiation with independent states; at the same time, he thought she might have used conduct to wards France somewhat more firm, without exceeding the sober language of truth and justice. There was still something in the argument, that if violent language had been held it might have led towar—a result which he should have scrupulously deprecated. There was something so horribly devastative in war, some thing so afflicting to the human race—that hardly under any other circumstances than the imperative defence of national honour and independence, would
1451
1452
Mr. William Peel
said, he entirely approved of the conduct of his majesty's ministers throughout the late negotiations, and should, therefore, give his hearty assent to the amendment of the hon. member for Yorkshire. So far from thinking that his majesty's ministers had, in any part of their conduct, compromised the honour or interests of the country, he was of opinion, that never was its character and station better sustained, than it had been during the late proceedings at the congress at Verona. He would ask those gentlemen who were now so loud in the expression of their desire to involve the country in a war, whether they were prepared, if the government were really driven to hostilities, to afford that lavish expenditure which such a state would of necessity call for? It would be ridiculous to argue that the resources of this country were not sufficiently ample to enable her to embark in war, if war were necessary for her interests or honour. That country, to which every other country appealed, and to which every other country was indebted, was surely not the only country which could not support a war. That we possessed resources for carrying on a war was indisputable; but the Question was, whether those rescurces should be husbanded, or whether they should be squandered away unnecessarily? The best policy was that which his majesty's government had adopted. It was the true language of caution, "to beware of entering into the quarrel of another." With regard to the conduct adopted by France against Spain, there was no man more sensible than he was of the striking folly, absurdity, nay even madness of the French invasion. Indeed, he never thought France would have ventured upon so disastrous a step until she had actually passed the frontier. He trusted that God would send the Spaniards a speedy and a safe deliverance. Still he thought the policy of this country was neutrality. He knew such to be the wish of his constituents, and he believed it to be also that of the great bulk of the people at large.
Lord Palmerston
said, that he did not mean to enter into a discussion of the details of the papers on the table, but he wished to take a more general view of the question under consideration. Whatever difference of opinion might exist upon some points, there were two on which all seemed to agree; first, the injustice of
1453
1454
1455
1456
1457
1458
1459
Colonel Davies
said, he had only a few observations to offer to the House, and those few should be directed to show, that the gentlemen who supported the original motion were not necessarily the advocates of war. He would, however, say that, as far as his own individual feelings were concerned, if the result of the debate of that night was to decide the question of peace or war, his vote would be for war: but he was aware that a question of this importance ought not to be decided by individual feeling. Those hon. members who had spoken against the motion had, for the greater part, gone upon the expediency of maintaining a state of peace. But he maintained, that if his majesty's ministers had taken the firm and decided tone which became this country, they would have effectually deterred France from her aggressions upon Spain. [There was at this time so much coughing and confusion in the House, that the hon. officer was audible at intervals only.] He should be sorry to say any thing which might be offensive to hon. members, but as he did not intend to occupy much of the time of the House, he could assure them that those expressions of impatience, so far from having the effect of shortening the debate, would only tend to lengthen it; as be should
1460
Mr. Horace Twiss
rose amidst cries of question from the Opposition benches
1461
1462
1463
bonâ fide
1464
1465
1466
1467
1468
Sir Francis Blake
said, that when liberty was at stake, neutrality was not at all congenial to the generous feelings of the British nation. When the Spaniards were engaged in the glorious cause of liberty, it was natural that they should apply to England for assistance; and if we talked of neutrality, she might be apt to think of the old saying—"Those who are not with us are against us." But Spain ought to make a distinction between the government, and the people, of this country. The hearts of the people of Great Britain were with the brave Spaniards, but their ardent feelings were damped by the icy particles of the administration. If he were a Spaniard, be would say that ministers, by their policy, were silently—he would not say intentionally—upholding that most odious, detestable, and abominable league which
1469
1470
Lord Folkestone
apologized for addressing the House after having on a recent occasion occupied so much of their time. He did not know whether any apology was required from him by the House, for the manner in which he had then delivered his sentiments. It occurred to him that it was scarcely possible that the right hon. secretary opposite, notwithstanding the well-known turn for sarcasm which distinguished him, could have treated him (lord F.) in the manner in which he had done, unless there had been something unbecoming in the language which he had used. If that were the case, he was ready to make the necessary apology to the House. He was, undoubtedly angry upon that occasion. He had attempted to express the shame and indignation which he felt upon the perusal of the papers which had been presented to the House, and the scorn and contempt which he entertained for the British negotiators who could put their names to those papers. [Cheers.] If he had vented his feelings, in language not so measured as he ought to have used, he hoped the House of Commons was not yet so far sunk in degradation, as to visit him with its anger on that account. He might be allowed to urge in extenuation
1471
1472
Mr. Martin,
of Galway, said, he had not meant to rise to order; but, alter being called upon, he did not hesitate to say, that it was disorderly in the noble lord to entertain the House for half an hour, on the subject of another debate. If he had any charge to prefer against the right hon. secretary, let him bring it forward in a parliamentary way. He had thought his remarks impertinent to the present debate, and had therefore called the noble lord to order.
Lord Folkestone
proceeded. He said; he believed the hon. member was correct in his opinion; but the strict rule of order had often been departed from. Much latitude was allowed to members; and particularly on late occasions. If the rule was to be enforced against him, he hoped it would also be enforced against others: He could not participate in the satisfaction which had been expressed by the hon. member for Westminster and others, at the tone which had prevailed in that House during the course of the present debate with respect to the conduct of France. It appeared to him to be unbecoming the character of a British House of Commons, that its sentiments should be expressed in words alone,
vox et prœterea nihil,
1473
de jure,
1474
1475
1476
Mr. Littleton
rose, but was for some moments utterly inaudible. As soon as order was restored, the hon. gentleman observed in reference to the calls of the noble lord upon his right hon. friend that no just complaint could be made against his right hon. friend, for not having addressed the House at an earlier period. He believed every member of his majesty's government in that House had spoken upon it except his right hon. friend, and nothing could be more natural than that his right hon. friend, whose more peculiar office it was to explain the whole of the negotiations, should have waited until he had heard all the objections which might be made to them. He (Mr. L.) might, in his turn, express his surprise, that: the House had not, before the present hour, heard the sentiments of the hon. and learned gentleman (Mr. Brougham) upon the question before the House. He must suppose the hon. and learned gentleman
1477
1478
Mr. Secretary Canning
rose and said:
*
*
1479
1480
1481
*
*
1482
*
bruta fulmina
*
† See Papers, Class B, No 14. p. 935.
1483
areopagitical
*
*
1484
1485
"Fair sir, you spit on me on Wednesday last; You spurn'd me such a day; another time You called me—dog; and for these courtesies"
"—Medio de fonte leporum Surget amari aliquid, quod in ipsis floribus angat."
1486
1487
duresse
1488
*
*
1489
1490
1491
*
*
1492
VI. P. 328.—And he subjoins in a note—"La Médiation diffère essentiellement de l'interposition de bons offices; on peut accepter ceux-ci, et rejetter la médiation."
1493
*
*
1494
*
*
1495
Mr. Hobhouse
said, he disclaimed this version of his words. He had put it as a conjecture.
Mr. Canning.
— I assure the hon. gentleman that I understood him to state it as a fact: but if it was only conjecture, it is of a piece with the whole of the address Which he supports;—every paragraph of which teems with guesses and suppositions equally groundless.
European
French.
1496
French
French
toute Erropéenne;
toute Française et toute Européenne:
Française,
Européenne.
1497
*
in cypher
See Papers, Class B, No. 30, p. 952.
1498
Sir J. Mackintosh
said, that he had only used the word "sparing," as sparing the
delicacy,
Mr. Canning.
—I am glad to have occasioned this explanation: I have no doubt that my hon. and learned friend must have
1499
1500
1501
1502
*
*
1503
1504
1505
1506
were
did
1507
1508
1509
1510
1511
1512
quâ minimé reris,
1513
bona fide
1514
1515
other
1516
1517
l.
come
come what may.
*
*
"Art. II. If ever it shall happen that the kings of Spain and France, either the present or future, that both of them together, or either of them separately, shall make war, or give occasion to suspect that they intend to make war upon the kingdom of Portugal, either on the continent of Europe or in its dominions beyond seas; her majesty the queen of Great Britain, and the lords the states
1518
general, shall use their friendly offices with the said kings, or either of them, In order to persuade them to observe the terms of peace towards Portugal, and not to make war upon it."
"Art. III. But these good offices not proving successful, but altogether ineffectual, so that war should be made by the aforesaid kings, or by either of them, upon Portugal; the above mentioned powers of Great Britain and Holland shall make war, with all their force, upon the aforesaid king or kings, who shall carry hostile arms into Portugal."
† "Sed et hic distinguendum est, an Fœderatus meus injuriam patiatur, an ipse inferat; si patiatur, promissa implebo; si inferat, non implebo;"—"Cum pacta aiant
'qui bello petitur,'
qui ab
1519
1520
1521
1522
1523
*
suaviter in motto.
*
1524
at Verona,
French
Verona.
1525
strike at the root of the British constitution,
1526
"would have been!"
are
1527
Mr. Brougham
said, that, in rising to address the House at so protracted an hour, he should be under the necessity of passing over a great variety of those topics to which the right hon. secretary had, at such considerable length, adverted; and he trusted the House would give him credit for the assertion, that he would not detain them one instant longer, nor advert to one single point beyond the limits in which he found himself bound by the strongest necessity. The House had just heard from the right hon. gentleman, a most able and eloquent address: that the man who rose to answer it, must have fearful odds to contend with; and those odds were rendered the more fearful, from the circumstances that that address was a long one, and that the reply to it would be addressed to the minds of a jaded audience. But as he trusted that the merits of this momentous question would not be decided on the particular merits of a speaker on the one side or the other, but upon its own intrinsic merits, so he hoped to enforce a conviction on the minds of the House, that much yet remained unexplained—That the conduct of his majesty's ministers had been most unsatisfactory—that the country had been placed in a state in which she had never found herself before—that she had been compelled to suffer indignities which she would never before have put up with—and that therefore they ought not to shut their eyes to the facts of the case, and run away with the idea, that because the conduct of government had been defended in a most brilliant speech, the conduct of that government stood wholly spotless and unimpeached. He would take upon himself the task of showing, that that speech contained not one tittle of justification. Moreover, if time and the patience of the House would admit, there was not a particle of that harangue, to which he could not give a satisfactory answer, both from the admissions of the right hon. gentleman and his friends, and from the papers which the right hon. gentleman had laid
1528
1529
1530
ultra
cases fœderis.
cases fœderis,
1531
1532
1533
1534
cordon sanitaire
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545
1546
The Lord Mayor,
amidst loud cries of question! stated his intention to support the amendment.
Mr. Macdonald
said, in reply, that the three nights debate which had taken place would, he was confident, serve as an antedote to the mischief occasioned by the feebleness of the language adopted by his majesty's ministers, in the course of the recent negotiations. There was but one word in the amendment in which he could not concur. It was the word "earnest," as applied to the endeavours of ministers. If it meant merely, that ministers had been themselves earnest in their endeavours, he did not quarrel with it; and, on the grounds stated in the appeal which had just been made to him by his hon. and learned friend, he was ready to withdraw the address which he had proposed, and allow the amendment to stand as an original motion. [Cries of "no, no: divide divide"!]
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, that after having suffered for three long nights the constant, unceasing, unremitting, and unsparing lectures of the hon. gentlemen opposite, for a too ready concession to the views of foreign powers, it was incumbent upon him and his colleagues to show, that they had profited by the lesson that had been taught them, and that, though satisfied themselves with the amendment, they could not concur in the suggestion of withdrawing the original motion.
1547
1548
The following are the names of the gentlemen who remained in the House, and in consequence composed the Minority.
List of the Minority.
Blake, sir F.
Honywood, W. P.
Barrett, G. B. M.
Mitchell, J.
Bentinck, lord W.
Maberly, J.
Clifton, lord
Maberly, W. L.
Ellice, Edmund
Milton, lord
Gipps, G.
Plummer, J.
Grant, col.
Russell, lord J.
Grant, M.
Wood, M.
Clenorchy, lord
TELLERS.
Hutchinson, C. H.
Hume, J.
Holmes, W.
Hamilton, lord A.
INDEX
INDEX TO DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
A
Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session, 4
Agricultural Distress, 234
Appellate Jurisdiction, 1291
Austrian Loan, 124
B
Bankrupt Laws, 705
F
France and Spain; Dispute between, 236, 706, 839, 1059, 1175, 1289
K
King's Property Bill, 651
King's Speech on Opening the Session, 1
M
Marriage Act Amendment Bill, 87, 123, 235
Military and Naval Pensions Bill, 1298
N
National Debt Reduction Bill, 635, 649
Negotiations relative to Spain, 706, 839, 1059, 1175, 1289
S
Sinking Fund, 635, 649
Spain; Dispute between France and, 236, 706, 839, 1059, 1175, 1289
INDEX TO DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
A
Abolition of Slavery, 624, 766
Address on the King's Speech on Opening the Session, 37, 82
Agricultural Distress, 117, 254, 288, 539
Allen, Colonel; his Petition respecting the Loss of his Commission, 490
Army Estimates, 511, 521
Army Extraordinaries, 630, 654
Arundel Election, 683
Assessed Taxes, Repeal of, 603
Assessed Taxes Reduction Bill, 532
B
Bank of England Balances, 136
Beer and Ale Bill, 301, 646, 661
Bourbon Throne; Guarantee of, 691
Bowring, Mr.; his Imprisonment in France, 289
C
Caledonian Canal, 1126
Cape Breton, 684
Carlile, Mary Ann; her Petition for Release from Imprisonment, 709
Catholic Question, 1070, 1106, 1123
Church Establishment in Ireland, 367
Civil List, 692
Coal Duties, 749
Colonies; Revenue and Expenditure of the, 248
Combination of Workmen Bill, 366, 751
Committee of Supply, 110, 127
Contempt of Court, 808
Corn Laws, 264
Courier Newspaper; Complaint against, 1130
Courts of Justice in Ireland, 105
Crown Debtors, 808
Crown Lands in Ireland, 97
Currency; Alterations in the, 188
D
Dispute between France and Spain, 691, 771, 801, 872, 904, 1301
Dotterel and Carnation Cruizers; Case of the, 416
Dublin Theatre; Riot at the 243, 667, 812, 1149
Duncan, Lord; Monument to, 745
E
East India Sugar, 337
Equitable Adjustment of Contracts, 188, 1253
Ex-Officio Informations in Ireland, 964
F
Financial State of the Country, 194
First Fruits in Ireland, 802
Foreign Embassies, 692
Foreign Relatives, 615, 771
Foreign Trade of the Country, 98
Foreign Enlistment Bill; Repeal of the, 239, 1019
Forgery Laws Amendment Bill, 704
Four and a Half per Cent Leeward Island Duties, 590
France and Spain; Dispute between, 691, 771, 801, 872, 904, 1136, 1301
Free Thinkers' Zetetic Society; Petition from, 1014
G
Game Laws, 541, 1292
Grievances; Redress of, previous to a Supply, 127
H
Home, Colonel; Case of, 695
I
Insolvent Debtors Bill, 540, 609, 749
Inverness, Burgh of; Case of, 735
Ireland, State of, 790
Irish Church Establishment, 367
Irish Church Rates Bill, 1134
Irish Courts of Justice, 105
Irish Crown Lands, 97
Irish Ex Officio Informations, 964
Irish First Fruits, 802
Irish Government, 1144
Irish Miscellaneous Estimates, 829
Irish Quit Rents, 97
Irish Tithes, 89, 494, 1132
Irish Vice Treasurer, 93
Irish Yeomanry Corps, 93, 247
J
Jesuits; Petition respecting the Society of, 436
K
King's Library; the late, 92
King's Property, 489, 509
L
Leeward Island Duties, 590
Library; the late King's, 92, 600
Lieutenant-General of the Ordnance, 110, 140
Loan; Russian—Dutch, 96
M
Machinery; Use of, 1292
Marriage Act Amendment Bill, 80, 623
Merchant Vessels Apprenticeship Bill, 551, 663, 1125
Military and Naval Pensions Bill, 682, 822, 1123
Miscellaneous Services, 630, 654
Mutiny Bill, 552, 615
N
National Debt Reduction Bill, 340, 501, 534, 543, 579
Navy Estimates, 192, 241, 575
Negotiations relative to Spain, 801, 872, 904, 1136, 1301
Newfoundland Laws Bill, 702
Norfolk Petition for Reform and Equitable Adjustment, 1253
O
O'Grady, Chief Baron; Conduct of, 105
Orange Societies in Ireland, 443, 524, 757
Ordnance Estimates, 597
Ordnance; Lieutenant-general of the, 110, 140
P
Parliamentary Reform, 125, 1147, 1253, 1260
Penitentiary at Milbank, State of, 1298
Piracy in the West Indies, 416
Poor Laws, 367, 750
Profane Swearing Bill, 615
Q
Quit Rents in Ireland, 97
R
Ramsgate Harbour, 288
Reduction of Taxation, 302
Reform of Parliament, 125, 1147, 1253, 1260
Revenue Department Consolidation Bill, 704
Right of Voting, 172
Riot at the Dublin Theatre, 243, 667, 812, 1149
Roman Catholic Question, 1070, 1106, 1123
Russian—Dutch Loan, 96
S
Scotch Burghs, 735
Sheriff of Dublin; Conduct of, 1149
Sinking Fund, 91, 340, 501, 534, 543, 579
Slavery; Abolition of, 624, 766
Spain; Dispute between France and, 691, 771, 801, 872, 904, 1136, 1301
State of the Country; Financial, 194
Sugar; East India, 337
T
Taxation, Reduction of, 302
Tithes in Ireland, 89, 494
Tobago, 754
Trade of the Country; Foreign, 98
U
Usury Laws, 1144
V
Vice Treasurer of Ireland, 98
Vincent, Earl St.; Monument to, 745
Volunteer Corps in Ireland, 523
Voting; Right of, 172
W
Warehousing Bill, 642, 666, 1131
Westminster Abbey, 765, 1126
Whipping; Abolition of,
White, George; his Petition, 1300
Workmen; Combination of, 366, 751
Z
Zetetic Freethinkers Society at Edinburgh, 1014
INDEX OF NAMES—HOUSE OF LORDS.
A
Aberdeen, Earl of, 1220
B
Bexley, Lord, 642, 1299
Buckingham, Duke of, 1215
C
Canterbury, Archbishop of, 235
Cawdor, Lord, 1291
D
Darnley, Earl of, 37
E
Eldon, Earl of,
see
Ellenborough, Lord, 34, 87, 123, 236, 238, 641, 651, 652, 1175, 1252
G
Granville, Lord, 1214
Grey, Earl, 706, 708, 868, 1060, 1227
H
Harrowby, Earl of, 1194
Holland, Lord, 1059, 1067, 1202, 1289, 1290
K
King, Lord, 641, 871, 1059, 1218, 1298
L
Lansdown, Marquis of, 22, 124, 236, 237, 638, 1248, 1300
Liverpool. Earl of, 29, 124, 125, 237, 238, 635, 653, 706, 707, 708, 839, 1060, 1065, 1240, 1290, 1291, 1292, 1300
Lord Chancellor (Eldon) 88, 124, 651, 654, 705
M
Mayo, Earl of, 12
Morley, Earl of, 4
R
Redesdale, Lord, 88, 123, 654
Roseberry, Earl of, 1291
S
Somers, Earl, 234
Stanhope, Earl, 12
Stowell, Lord, 123
Sussex, Duke of, 1218
W
Wellington, Duke of, 1070, 1222
INDEX OF NAMES—HOUSE OF COMMONS.
A
Aberoromby, Hon. James, 94, 109, 116, 173, 246, 443, 489, 531, 610, 678, 1096
Acland, Sir T. D. 716
Althorp, Viscount, 610, 1019
Arbuthnot, Right Hon. Charles, 1129
Attorney General, [Sir Robert Gifford], 623, 719, 1013, 1438
Attwood, Matthias, 282
B
Bankes, Henry, 1095, 1161, 1350
Bankes, George, 1121
Baring Alexander, 104, 137, 221, 319, 357, 365, 507, 587, 682, 828, 1044, 1352
Baring, Sir Thomas, 1297, 1441
Barry, Colonel, 500, 667, 681, 1000, 1166
Becher, W. 1122
Bennet, Hon. Henry Grey, 116, 229, 260, 362, 493, 522, 532, 540, 579, 633, 660, 1087, 1130, 1298, 1437
Benett, John, 233, 273, 503, 520, 644, 662, 695
Bernal, Ralph, 519, 552, 596, 665, 690
Blake, Sir Francis, 550, 573, 608, 825, 1047, 1125, 1286, 1468
Bourne, S. 1440
Bright, Henry, 253, 433, 532, 540, 612, 635, 643, 665, 690, 702, 769, 1131
Brougham, Henry, 45, 115, 192, 301, 897, 1006, 1089, 1099, 1102, 1172, 1436, 1527
Browne, Dominick, 645
Brownlow, Charles, 243, 246, 443, 964, 1162
Brydges, Sir John, 524
Burdett, Sir Francis, 64, 116, 616, 694, 725, 1071, 1089, 1097, 1149, 1426
Buxton, Thomas Fowell, 649, 663
C
Calcraft, John, 335, 501
Calvert, N. 1439
Canning, Right Hon. George, 105, 113, 118, 126, 134, 160, 174, 193, 241, 293, 301, 434, 488, 691, 692, 770, 786, 801, 872, 904 1011, 1047, 1078, 1079, 1091, 1092, 1094, 1098, 1102, 1171, 1478
Carew, R. S. 500
Chancellor of the Exchequer [Right Hon. Frederick Robinson], 135, 137, 194, 234, 245, 302, 308, 340, 532, 533, 545, 582, 600, 644, 646, 649, 661, 662, 682, 703, 704, 745, 822, 827, 1092, 1123, 1130, 1386
Chandos, Marquis of, 1297
Childe, William Lacon, 37
Clerk, Sir George, 243, 576
Cockburn, Sir George, 428, 433, 664
Coffin, Sir Isaac, 433, 578, 579, 665, 1126, 1440
Coke, T. W. 1071, 1258
Colbourn, N. W. R. 543, 1148
Copley, Sir John;
see
Courtenay, William, 620, 1000, 1298
Courtenay, Thomas Peregrine, 1039
Cranborne, Lord, 541
Creevey, Thomas, 126, 127, 182, 511, 590, 656
Croker, Thomas Wilson, 246, 577, 1127
Cumming, George, 743
Curwen, John Christian, 120, 269, 532, 542, 750, 1373
D
Daly, James, 1013.
Davies, Colonel, 85, 490, 493, 521, 548, 553, 574, 621, 801, 1459
Dawson, George, 466, 529, 634, 757, 833, 1439
De Crespigny, Sir William, 518, 607, 1350
Denison, J. W. 254, 622
Denman, Thomas, 77, 405, 514, 1057, 1158
Disbrowe, Mr. 1369
Douglas, Keith, 644
Drummond, Home, 1441
E
East, Sir Edward Hyde, 1274
Ellice, Edward, 578, 588, 614, 1297
Estcourt, T. G. 1442
F
Fergusson, Sir Roland, 116, 744
Fitzgerald, Maurice, 245, 399, 478, 498
Fitzgerald, Vesey, 89, 95, 501
Folkestone, Viscount, 188, 229, 258, 264, 289, 1022, 1030, 1470
Forbes, Charles, 744
Fremantle, W. 520
G
Gascoyne, Isaac, 1123
Gifford, Sir Robert,
see
Gilbert, Davies, 362
Gipps, George, 542
Gladstone, John, 665
Gordon, W. 743
Gonlbourn, Right Hon. Henry, 90, 94, 95, 97, 108, 247, 248, 390, 460, 494, 531, 806, 830, 831, 833, 834, 836, 838, 1004, 1133, 1165
Gower, Lord Francis Leveson, 1356
Graham, Sir James, 749
Grant, Right Hon. Charles, 110, 1144
Grattan, James, 409, 488, 662, 666, 679, 832, 838,
Grenfell, Pascoe, 91, 136, 138, 140, 534, 683, 823, 829
Guise, Sir W. 634
Gurney, Hudson, 571, 1044, 1125, 1257
H
Haldimand, William, 825
Hamilton, Lord Archibald, 289, 301, 587, 661, 679, 735, 744, 771, 835, 838, 1094
Hart, General, 531
Heron, Sir Robert, 1106, 1147, 1440
Herries, J. C. 608
Heygate, Mr. Alderman, 92, 749,
Hill, Sir George, 525, 666
Hobhouse, John Cam, 239, 442, 611, 615, 619, 1335, 1373, 1439
Holford, George, 1298
Hotham, Lord, 573, 681
Hume, Joseph, 90, 91, 93, 96, 97, 98, 105, 110, 115, 134, 139, 140, 167 224, 241, 247, 248, 352, 365, 367, 409, 442, 493, 503, 510, 513, 514, 518, 519, 521, 522, 523, 539, 547, 571, 575, 577, 580, 595, 597, 598, 599, 614, 630, 632, 634, 646, 655, 657, 665, 683, 684, 690, 693, 703, 709, 732, 743, 765, 808, 825, 830, 831, 833, 833, 834, 838, 1017, 1018, 1104, 1124, 1126, 1127, 1128, 1129, 1134, 1135, 1260, 1297, 1300, 1301,
Huskisson. Right Hon. William, 277, 330, 366, 551, 585, 588, 663, 693, 829, 1125, 1126, 1292
Hutchinson, Hon. C. H. 86, 116, 299, 439, 501, 570.
J
James, William, 1259,
Johnson, Colonel, 1147
Jones, John, 513, 622
K
Knatohbull, Sir E. 540
L
Lamb, Hon. William, 134, 1028
Lambton, John George, 680, 1122.
Lennard, T. B. 692, 1439
Lethbridge, Sir Thomas, 117, 287, 436, 512, 539, 1070, 1286
Lewis, Frankland, 662
Leycester, Ralph, 288, 348, 1449
Littleton, E. J. 1476
Long, Sir Charles, 595, 602
Lord Advocate of Scotland [Sir W. Rae], 741, 1017
Lushington, Stephen Rumbold, 92, 1127, 1301
Lushington, Dr. 675, 702, 704, 811, 1030, 1441
M
Maberly, John, 139, 213, 254, 302, 336, 603, 827
Maborly, William, 255, 313, 550, 1369
Macdonald, James, 170, 776, 1301, 1546
Mackintosh, Sir James, 70, 1399
Manning, William, 138, 140, 288
Marryat, James, 416, 435, 644, 664, 1034
Martin, John, 139, 539
Martin, Richard, 1105, 1284, 1441, 1472
Maxwell, John, 366, 1292
Milton, Lord, 186, 231, 1002, 1147, 1162
Monck, J. B. 263, 287, 409, 504 539, 832, 1018, 1125
Moore, Peter, 366, 609
N
Newport, Sir John, 465, 499, 530, 614, 615, 622, 645, 679, 702, 802, 831, 832, 833, 837, 839, 1106, 1123, 1134, 1166, 1285
Nolan, Michael, 367.
Normanby, Lord, 1273
Nugent, Lord, 1078
O
O'Grady, Captain, 519
Ommaney, Sir F. 578
Onslow, Mr. Serjeant, 1144
Osborn, Sir John, 192, 575, 577
P
Palmer, Charles Fyshe, 520
Palmerston, Viscount, 491, 513, 518, 519, 522, 523, 566, 574, 700, 1452
Parnell, Sir Henry, 89, 226, 499, 536, 548, 645, 1128, 1130
Peel, Mr. Secretary, 65, 90, 93, 109, 181, 262, 402, 407, 481, 509, 539, 540, 542, 618, 633, 660, 667, 677, 724, 729, 743, 811, 832, 1087, 1102, 1146, 1168, 1292, 1298, 1414, 1440,
Peel, William, 1452
Philips, George, 645, 1292
Phillimore, Dr. 80, 615, 623, 680, 1034
Plunkett, Right Hon. W. C. 244, 407, 530, 669, 817, 979, 1107, 1123, 1153.
R
Rae, Sir William,
see
Ricardo, David, 104, 138, 219, 255, 264, 280, 314, 505, 538, 552, 588, 622, 646, 663, 722, 811, 1124, 1126, 1279
Rico, Thomas Spring, 90, 96, 105, 110, 500, 528, 666, 679, 1105, 1132, 1167
Ridley, Sir M. W. 540, 645
Robertson, Alexander, 121, 224, 349, 642, 1374
Robinson, Right Hon. Frederick,
see
Russell, Lord John, 92, 127, 172, 691, 693, 1035, 1260
S
Scarlett, James, 1013
Sebright, Sir John, 541
Shelley, Sir John, 503, 542
Smith, Alderman C. 1438
Smith, John, 364, 504, 536, 1440
Smith, Robert, 1147,
Smith, William, 502, 744, 771, 838, 1127, 1130
Solicitor General [Sir John Singleton Copley], 540, 612, 614, 810
Speaker, The [Right Hon. C. M. Sutton], 410, 683, 1091, 1092, 1093, 1098
Stanley, Lord, 1292
Stewart, Sir John, 245
Stuart, William, 399
Stuart Wortley, John, 287, 540, 643, 1148, 1328
Sumner, Holme, 259, 517, 661, 1297, 1364, 1440
Sutton, Right Hon. C. Manners,
see
Sykes, Daniel, 612, 664, 1149
T
Taylor, Michael Angelo, 703, 1256, 1259
Thompson, Alderman, 433, 662
Tierney, Right Hon. George, 324, 543, 583, 1081, 1093, 1102, 1169
Townshend, Lord Charles, 1260
Trench, Colonel, 89, 681
Tulk, C. A. 703
Twiss, Horace, 1460
W
Wallace, Right Hon. Thomas, 98, 288, 643, 666, 1131
Ward, Robert, 148, 595, 597, 598, 599
Warre, J. A. 786
Wetherell, Charles, 533, 812, 1127
White, Luke, 1071.
Whitmore, W. 264, 287, 579, 1365
Wilberforce, William, 624, 729, 1361
Wildman, James B, 42
Williams, John, 158, 1297, 1377
Williams, William, 623, 662, 1450
Wilmot, R. J. 252, 441, 596, 631, 655, 658, 688, 702, 1096
Wilson, Sir Robert, 82, 232, 239, 297, 493, 612, 621, 691, 766, 1040, 1097
Wilson, Thomas, 127, 226, 361, 432, 522, 552 621, 645, 1333
Wilson, W. C. 615
Wodehouse, Edmond, 232, 259, 275
Wood, Mr. Alderman, 125, 302, 634, 649, 661, 1298, 1441
Wood, Colonel, 287 367, 502, 543
Wynn, C. W. W. 494, 572, 610, 661, 734, 1046, 1086, 1089, 1095, 1145, 1297, 1436, 1442
Y
Yorke, Sir Joseph, 44, 494, 578, 1043, 1124, 1298.
END OF VOL. VIII.