COBBETT'S
Parlimentary Debates,
DURING THE
FIRST SESSION OF THE THIRD PARLIAMENT
OF THE
UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT-BRITAIN AND IRELAND,
AND OF THE
KINGDOM OF GREAT-BRITAIN THE TWENTIETH,
Appointed to meet at Westminster, the Fifteenth Day of December, One Thousand Eight Hundred and Six: And, also, during the First Session of the Fourth Parliament of the said United Kingdom, appointed to meet at Westminster, the Twenty-Second Day of June, in the Forty-seventh Year of the Reign of his Majesty King GEORGE the Third, Annoque Domini One Thousand Eight Hundred and Seven.
VOL. IX.
COMPRISING THE PERIOD
BETWEEN THE 5th OF MARCH AND THE 14th OF AUGUST, 1807.
LONDON:
PRINTED BY J. BRETTELL AND CO. MARSHALL-STREET, GOLDEN-SQUARE:
PUBLISHED BY R. BAGSHAW, BRYDGES-STREET, COVENT-GARDEN; AND SOLD ALSO
BY J. BUDD, PALL-MALL; R. FAULDER, NEW BOND-STREET; H. D. SYMONDS,
PATERNOSTER-ROW; BLACKS AND PARRY, LEADENHALL-STREET;
AND J. ARCHER, DUBLIN.
1807.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
HOUSE OF LORDS.
From March 5, to the Dissolution of the Third Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, April 27, 1807.
1807 March 9. Scotch Judicature bill.—The lord chancellor (Erskine)
62
10. Scotch Judicature bill.—Lord Grenville, the lord chancellor, lord Grenville, lord Eldon, earl of Lauderdale
66
12. Scotch Judicature bill.—Lord Grenville, lord Kinnaird, earl of Lauderdale, lord Eldon, lord Grenville, lord Auckland, the lord chancellor
83
13. Scotch Judicature bill.—Lord Grenville, duke of Montrose, marquis of Abercorn, earl of Lauderdale
108
16. Scotch Judicature bill.—Duke of Montrose, lord Redesdale, earl of Selkirk, lord Eldon, lord Grenville, lord Melville, earl of Lauderdale, earl of Mansfield
111
18. Slave-Trade Abolition bill.—Lord Grenville
146
Scotch Judicature bill.—Lord Grenville, lord Eldon, lord chancellor, lord Melville, earl of Lauderdale
147
23. Slave-Trade Abolition bill.—Earl of Westmoreland, lord Grenville, bp. of Landaff, earl of Westmoreland, marq. of Sligo, duke of Norfolk
168
25. Scotch Judicature bill.—Lord Grenville, lord Eldon
187
26. Commerce of the Country.—Lord Auckland, earl of Westmoreland
229
Change of Administration.—Lord Grenville, lord Sidmouth, lord Hawkesbury, lord Moira, lord Melville, lord Grenville, lord Holland, earl of Carnarvon, lord Hawkesbury, earl of Buckinghamshire, the lord chancellor (Erskine), marquis of Stafford
231
April 8. Change of Administration.—Marquis of Stafford
280
13. Change of Administration.—Marquis of Stafford, lord Aberdeen, earl of Hardwicke, lord Erskine, earl of Jersey, lord Harrowby, earl of Selkirk, lord Boringdon, lord Kinnaird, lord Sidmouth, earl of Lauderdale, lord Mulgrave, earl of Limerick, lord Holland, earl of Westmoreland, earl Darnley, lord Grenville, lord Hawkesbury, earl Camden, earl Moira, lord chancellor (Eldon), duke of Norfolk ,
350
16. Capture of Monte Video.—Lord Hawkesbury, earl of Galloway, lord Mulgrave
475
17. Scotch Judicature bill.—Lord Kinnaird, earl of Lauderdale, duke of Montrose, lord chancellor, lord Auckland, lord Hawkesbury, lord Holland, lord Melville, lord Hawkesbury, lord Grenville
481
20. Scotch Judicature bill.—Lord Auckland, lord chancellor, lord Grenville, lord Hawkesbury, lord Kinnaird, lord Lauderdale, duke of Athol, lord Melville
493
21. Capture of Monte Video.—Earl Moira, earl of Galloway, earl Spencer, earl Moira, earl of Galloway
502
22. Scotch Judicature bill.—Lord Erskine, lord Grenville
507
23. Scotch Judicature bill.—Lord Erskine, lord Grenville, duke of Athol, the lord chancellor
515
Loan Interest bill.—Lord Auckland, duke of Montrose, lord Sidmouth, lord Kinnaird, lord Mulgrave, lord Grenville, earl of Westmoreland, lord Grenville, lord Harrowby, lord Hawkesbury, lord Lauderdale, earl of Buckinghamshire, lord Grenville, earl Spencer, lord Holland
518
27. The Lords Commissioners' Speech on proroguing the Parliament
551
From the Opening of the First Session of the Fourth Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, on the 22d of June, to its Close on the 14th of August, 1807.
1807. June 22. Meeting of the New Parliament
565
23. Choice of a Speaker of the House of Commons
574
1807 June 26. The Lords Commissioners' Speech on Opening the Session.—Earl of Mansfield, lord Rolle, earl Fortescue, lord Boringdon, lord Holland, lord Mulgrave, lord Holland, lord Erskine, earl Grosvenor, lord Sidmouth, earl of Selkirk, earl of Rosslyn, earl of Buckinghamshire, lord Grenville, lord Sidmouth, lord chancellor, lord Lauderdale, lord Hawkesbury
577
29. American Trade bill.—Lord Hawkesbury, lord Auckland, lord Holland, lord Hawkesbury, lord Grenville, lord Holland, earl Bathurst, lord Grenville, the lord chancellor, lord Harrowby, lord Grenville
664
Scotch Judicature bill.—Lord Grenville, lord chancellor, lord Grenville, lord Hawkesbury, duke of Athol, earl of Rosslyn, lord Lauderdale
666
30. Private bills.—Lord chancellor, lord Grenville
681
American Trade bill.—Lord Hawkesbury, lord Grenville
682
July 10. Defence of the Country.—Lord Sidmouth, earl Bathurst
*
13. Defence of the Country.—Lord Sidmouth, lord Hawkesbury, earl of Suffolk
769
American Indemnity bill.—Earl Bathurst, lord Grenville, lord Hawkesbury, earl Spencer, lord Erskine, lord chancellor, lord Carysfort, earl of Limerick, lord Holland, lord Sidmouth, lord Redesdale, earl of Buckinghamshire, lord Grenville, earl of Westmoreland
769
14. American Indemnity bill.—Lord Holland
806
American Trade bill.—Lord Holland, earl Bathurst, lord Harrowby, lord Lauderdale, lord Mulgrave, ford Lauderdale, lord chancellor
806
17. Irish Glebe Houses bill.—Earl of Hardwicke, earl of Suffolk
837
Defence of the Country.—Earl of Suffolk
838
23. Irish Glebe Houses bill.—Earl of Hardwicke, lord Redesdale, archbishop of Dublin
906
27. Dispute with America.—Lord Holland, lord Hawkesbury, lord Holland
926
29. King's Messages relative to Sweden and Prussia.—Lord Hawkesbury, lord Holland, lord Lauderdale, lord Holland, lord Mulgrave
986
Irish Insurrection bill.—Lord Hawkesbury, lord Holland, earl of Limerick, duke of Bedford, earl of Limerick, lord Kingston, earl of Hardwicke, lord Carleton, earl of Selkirk
989
American Indemnity bill
996
August 4. Offices in Reversion bill.—Lord Arden, earl Grosvenor, lord Lauderdale, lord Melville, lord Holland, lord Lauderdale, lord Melville, lord Selkirk, lord Boringdon
1044
*
10. Scotch Judicature bill.—Lord chancellor, earl of Selkirk, lord Lauderdale
1106
Neutral Powers.—Earl Stanhope
1106
Militia Transfer bill.—Lord Hawkesbury, lord Sidmouth, lord Boringdon, lord De Dunstanville, earl of Selkirk
1106
11. Parochial Schools bill.—Lord Hawkesbury, lord Holland, lord Redesdale, lord chancellor, archbishop of Canterbury, earl Stanhope
1174
Irish Arms bill.—Lord Holland, lord Hawkesbury, lord Hardwicke, lord Redesdale
1178
12. Militia Transfer bill.—Lord Sidmouth*, lord Hawkesbury, lord Chancellor, lord Mulgrave, lord Sidmouth
1181
13. Dispute with America.—Earl Stanhope, lord chancellor, earl Morton
1183
14. The Lords Commissioners' Speech at the Close of the Session
1221
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
From March 5, to the Dissolution of the Third Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, April 27, 1807.
1807 March 5. Roman Catholics' Army and Navy Service bill.—Lord Howick, mr. Perceval, lord Temple, mr. Yorke, mr. Montague, mr. Fremantle, mr. T. W. Plumer, mr. Corry, mr. I. H. Browne, lord Howick
2
Committee of Supply: Prussian Subsidy.—Mr. Bankes, lord H. Petty, lord Howick
20
*
March 5. Mr. Paull's Petition respecting the Westminster Election.—Mr. Sheridan, mr. Perceval, lord Howick, mr. Sheridan, mr. Whitbread
23
6. Conduct of Mr. Cawthorne.—Colonel Wilder, general Porter
57
Call of the House.—Mr. Perceval, the speaker, lord H. Petty
58
Slave-Trade Abolition bill.—Sir C. Pole, mr. Ward, sir P. Francis, mr. Fuller, general Vyse, sir T. Turton, mr. H. Addington, mr. Whitbread, mr. Rose, lord H. Petty, mr. Canning, mr. Bathurst
59
9. Mutiny bill.—The secretary at war
63
Slave-Trade Abolition bill.—Lord Howick, messrs. Hibbert, Vyse, Rose, Wilberforce, Fuller, Barham, Dickenson, Gascoyne, lord Howick
63
10. Petition of Mr. Cochrane Johnstone.—Mr. Whitbread, secretary at war, mr. W. Dundas, mr. Whitbread, mr. Plumer, sir E. Knatchbull
70
11. Committee of Supply: Miscellaneous Services
79
Freehold Estates bill.—Colonel Eyre, messrs. Roscoe, Simeon, N. Calvert, H. Martin, the solicitor-general
81
12. West-India Planters' Petition.—Mr. Hibbert, mr. Jacob, mr. Rose, lord Temple, mr. Wilberforce
85
Mutiny bill.—Lord Castlereagh, mr. Windham, mr. Rose, col. Shipley, col. Barry, sir J. Pulteney, sir J. Doyle, mr. Perceval, mr. Windham, mr. Perceval, mr. Fawkes, mr. Perceval
101
16. Slave-Trade Abolition bill.—Mr. Hibbert, sir P. Francis, messrs. Lyttleton, H. Thornton, Herbert, T. W. Plumer, Barham, Windham, Sheridan, lord Castlereagh, messrs. Wilberforce, Windham, Wilberforce, Windham, Barham
114
17. Abolition of Slavery.—Earl Percy, lord H. Petty, mr. Eden, sir C. Pole, messrs. Wilberforce, Herbert, Sheridan, Moore, Manning, Pole
142
18. Roman Catholics' Army and Navy Service bill.—Lord Howick
149
Mr. Paull's Petition respecting the Westminster Election.—Mr. Sheridan, mr. M. A. Taylor, lord Folkestone, mr. Whitbread, mr. M. A. Taylor
150
Freehold Estates bill.—Mr. Tuffnell, mr. Simeon, master of the rolls, mr. C. Wynne, mr. Calvert, lord advocate, mr. Canning, solicitor-general
159
19. Scotch Taxes Regulation bill.—Lord H. Petty
166
23. Change of Administration.—Mr. W. Dickenson, lord Howick
172
Carnatic Papers.—Sir T. Turton, mr. Tierney, col. Symes, sir J. Anstruther
174
24. Lancaster Election.—Mr. Dent, mr. Tierney
177
Offices in Reversion.—Mr. Bankes, mr. Yorke, lord Howick, mr. Plumer, sir J. Newport, mr. Johnstone, mr. Plumer, lord H. Petty, messrs. H. Martin, Gascoyne, Horner, Sheridan, Huskisson, Whitbread, Huskisson, Parnell, Johnstone
178
25. Irish Budget.—Sir John Newport
189
Affairs of India.—Sir P. Francis, mr. Tierney
191
Office of the Duchy of Lancaster.—Mr. H. Martin, mr. I. W. Ward, mr. Perceval, mr. Plumer, lord H. Petty, messrs. S. Bourne, Sharpe, Montague, H. Thornton, Johnstone, Sheridan, Johnstone, Sheridan, Simeon, Fuller, Wilberforce, master of the rolls, lord Howick, mr. S. Bourne, general Graham
194
26. Change of Administration.—Lord Howick, messrs. Huskisson, Fuller, Loftus
261
April 9. Change of Administration.—Mr. Brand, mr. Lambe, gen. Craufurd, messrs. Ord, W. Keene, Wharton, Fawkes, Osborn, Bastard, M. Fitzgerald, T. Turton, Curwen, Tuffnell, Fuller, Plunkett, chancellor of the exchequer, Grattan, Duigenan, Horner, Sheridan, lord Howick, messrs. Canning, Grenville, the speaker, Duigenan, Romilly, Bathurst, Murray, Whitbread, Rose, lord Howick, lord H. Petty
284
13. Poor-Laws bill.—Mr. Whitbread, mr. S. Lefevre
423
Finance Committee.—Mr. Ward, lord H. Petty, mr. Ward
425
Barrack Commission.—Lord H. Petty, chancellor of the exchequer, mr. Windham
425
Loan Interest bill.—Chancellor of the Exchequer, lord H. Petty, sir T. Turton, mr. Tierney
427
1807 April 15. Change of Administration.—Messrs.Lyttleton, Hibbert, Milnes, Ward, H. Browne, Macdonald, Tighe, Robinson, Gore, Roscoe, Newport, Bankes, Tierney, lord Castlereagh, lord Howick, mr. Bathurst, earl Percy, chanc. of the excheq. mr. Windham, master of the rolls
432
16. Capture of Monte Video.—Lord Castlereagh, mr. Windham, sir J. Doyle, mr. M. Matthew
476
17. Poor-Laws bill.—Messrs. Whitbread, Curwen, Plumer, chancellor of the exchequer, Fellowes, Patteson, Fuller, Giddy, Parnell, Milbanke, Le Fevre, Whitbread, Windham, Wilberforce, Bathurst
490
20. Mutiny at Vellore.—Mr. Howorth, mr. R. Dundas, mr. Corry
496
Irish Churches and Glebe Houses.—Messrs. Wickham, Duigenan, Newport, chancellor of the exchequer, M. Fitzgerald, Parnell
497
Irish Grand Jury Presentments.—Messrs. M. Fitzgerald, Parnell, Wilberforce, M. Fitzgerald
499
21. Penryn Election: Sir .C. Hawkins.—Mr. A. Wright, the speaker, sir C. Hawkins, messrs. Herbert, Wynne, Lee Keck, Hurst, chancellor of the exchequer, Bankes, Wright
504
22. Governor of Curacoa.—Col. Wood, Mr. Windham, lord Castlereagh, col. Wood
507
Third Military Report.—Lord A. Hamilton, chancellor of the exchequer
509
Penryn Election: Sir C. Hawkins.—Mr. A. Wright, the speaker, Capt. Herbert, lord A. Hamilton, messrs. Herbert, Lee Keck, E. Stewart, Hurst, Wynne, Whitbread, Rose, Lethbridge, Simeon, Leycester, Hurst, Swann, chancellor of the exchequer, Bankes, Fuller, Wynne, S. Bourne, Whitbread
509
23. Calico Printers' bill.—Sir R. Peele, messrs. Giddy, Jacob, Moore, H. Erskine, Sheridan
532
24. Poor-Laws bill.—Messrs. Whitbread, Ellison, Rose Fuller, Buller, Roscoe, Calcraft, H. Erskine, Giddy, S. Stanhope, Sharpe, lord Porchester, Simeon, G. Vansittart, Bathurst, Wilberforce, Windham, Whitbread, chancellor of the exchequer
538
From the Opening of the First Session of the Fourth Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, on the 22d of June, to its Close, on the 14th of August 1807.
1807 June 22. Choice of a Speaker.—Mr. Yorke, mr. Bankes, mr. Calcraft, mr. W. Smith, mr. Abbot, chancellor of the exchequer
566
26 The Lords Commissioners' Speech.—Lord Newark, mr. Hall lord Howick, chancellor of the exchequer, Mr. Windham, gen. Craufurd, sir H. Mildmay, mr. D. Browne, lord Cochrane, mr. Grattan, lord Milton, mr. R. Dundas, mr. Bathurst, lord Pollington, gen. Hope, messrs. Croker, S. Wortley, W. Smith, Bathurst, Ryder, lord Temple, lord H. Petty, mr. Canning, mr. Grenville, mr. Whitbread, sir A. Wellesley, sir J. Newport
608
27. India Budget.—Mr. R. Dundas, lord Howick, mr. R. Dundas
662
Irish Revenue bills.—Lord Howick, mr. Rose, mr. Foster, sir J. Newport
663
29. Offices in Reversion bill.—Mr. Bankes, sir J. Newport, mr. Herbert, lord H. Petty, sir A. Wellesley
669
Resolutions relating to Private Bills.—The speaker, chancellor of the exchequer, lord H. Petty, mr. Curwen, lord Howick
670
Conduct of Marquis Wellesley.—Lord Folkestone, sir J. Anstruther, lord Folkestone, mr. Creevey, mr. H. Addington, the speaker
674
Memorial of Sir H. Mildmay.—Sir H. Mildmay, mr. S. Bourne, sir H. Mildmay, mr. Canning, lord Howick, lord H. Petty
675
30. British and Foreign Shipping.—Mr. Eden, mr. Rose, lord Howick, chancellor of the exchequer, sir C. Price, lord H. Petty, Lord Castlereagh, lord Temple, mr. Canning, mr. Whitbread, mr. Canning, Dr. Laurence, mr. Montague
682
1807 Breach of Privilege.—Mr. Sturges Bourne
688
June 30. British Troops in the West Indies.—Mr. C. Johnstone, lord Castlereagh, mr. Windham, secretary at war, mr. W. Smith, mr. C. Johnstone
689
Finance Committee.—Chancellor of the exchequer, lord H. Petty, messrs Boyle, Biddulph, Brand, Canning, Curwen, Canning, Laurence, Romilly, Bankes, Whitbread, Addington, lord Cochrane, col. Shipley, messrs. S. Wortley, Bankes, Huskisson, H. Thornton, Combe, Sharpe, Lambe, lord A. Hamilton, lord Howick, chancellor of the exchequer, lord Howick, mr. Biddulph, lord Howick
692
July 2. Clothing of Veteran Battalions.—Mr. Rose, lord Temple, mr Long, lord Howick, chancellor of the exchequer, mr. Windham. mr. Johnstone, mr. Wilberforce, lord H. Petty, gen. Tarletor, mr. Huskisson
717
Sheriffs Depute or Sutherland, &c. and Lord Cullen's pension.—Mr. W. Adam, lord advocate, messrs. Wynne, C. Johnstone, R. Dundas, Laing, marquis of Titchfield, W. Dundas, solicitor-general for Scotland, mr. Croker, chancellor of the exchequer, messrs. H. Martin, Canning, Rose, Martin, Windham, lord H. Petty, Mr. Adam
721
Pensions to Chancellors.—Mr. Huskisson, lord Howick
729
3. Pensions to Chancellors.—Mr. Huskisson, lord Howick
731
Navy, Army and Ordnance Estimates.—Mr. R. Ward, secretary at war, mr. Ashton
732
6. Petition against Mr. Galway Mills.—Mr. C. Johnstone
733
State of the Nation.—Mr. Whitbread, mr. D. Browne mr. Whitbread, mr. Milnes, lord Milton, sir A. Piggott, messrs. H. Smith, D. Browne, M. Montague, Tarleton, W. Adam, Wilberforce, Laurence, Bathurst, Newport, Croker, W. Smith, chancellor of the exchequer, lord Howick
734
7. Standing Order for the Exclusion of Strangers.—Mr. Sheridan, mr. D. Browne, the speaker, mr. Whitbread
744
Pensions, Places, Sinecures,&c. held by Members of parliament.—Lord Cochrane, messrs. Bankes,Curwen, Whitbread, chancellor of the exchequer, lord Ossulston, messrs. J. Smith, Lethbridge Luttleton, Sebright, W. Smith, Wilberforce, Sheridan, Huskitson, Calcraft, Rose, chancellor of the exchequer, lord Cochrane, mr. Whitbread, lord H. Petty, mr. Canning, mr. N. Calvert, lord Cochrane, mr. W. Smith, chancellor of the exchequer, messrs. Whitbread, Bankes, Sheridan, Wilberforce, Laurence, Rose, Calcraft
745
8. East-India Company's Bonds bill.—Mr. Creevey, mr. R. Dundas, mr. P. Moore
743
*
Committee of Privileges.—Messrs. Rose, Moore, Wynne, C. Johnstone, Ellison, Barham, chancellor of the exchequer, Herbert, W. Smith
744
*
Memorial of Sir H. Mildmay—Sir H. Mildmay, lord Howick, mr. Canning
747
*
Sale of Commissions in the Army.—Mr. C. Johnstone, secretary at war
750
*
9. Irish Insurrection bill.—Sir A. Wellesley, sir J. Newport, chancellor of the exchequer, mr. Grattan, mr. Sheridan, mr. Whitbread
751
*
10. Naval. Abuses.—Lord Cochrane, sir S. Hood, admiral Hervey, admiral Markham, chancellor of the exchequer, mr. Windham, mr. R. Ward, sir C Pole, mr. Sheridan, lord Cochrane
754
Election Petitions.—Chancellor of the exchequer
768
13. Defence of the Country.—Mr. Whitbread chancellor of the exchequer, mr. Whitbread, lord Howick, mr Canning
794
Roman Catholic College at Maynooth.—Mr. Foster, mr. Wynne, lord Howick, the speaker, lord Hood
796
Parochial Schools bill.—Messrs, D. Giddy, Morris, Ellison, S. Bourne, Romilly, Rose, Lushington, R. Dundas, Simeon, lord Milton, mr. Wharton, mr. Whitbread, marquis of Titchfield, mr. Whitbread, chancellor of the exchequer, mr. S. Lefevre, mr. Whitbread, sir J. Newport, sir T. Turton, mr. Simeon, mr. S. Stanhope, lord H. Petty
798
14. Army Clothing and Agency.—Mr. C. Johnstone, secretary at war, mr. Rose, mr. Windham, mr. C. Johnstone
810
Sinking Fund.—Chancellor of the exchequer, lord H. Petty, messrs. Huskisson, Dent, Addington, Long, Giddy, Vansittart, Rose
813
1807. July 15. Roman Catholic College at Maynooth.—Messrs, Foster, Elliot, H. Browne, Windham, Parnell, W. Smith, chancellor of the exchequer, lord H. Petty, mr. J. L. Foster, mr. Dillon, sir J. Newport, chancellor of the exchequer, lord Howick, mr. Foster, lord Howick col. Barry, mr. Sheridan, col. Barry, mr. Sheridan, dr. Duigenan, lord Howick, lord Milton, mr. Grattan
817
16. Complaint respecting the Poole Writ.—Mr. Jeffery, mr. Creevey
830
Volunteers.—Sir T. Turton, chancellor of the exchequer, mr. S. Lefevre, sir T. Turton
831
East-India Bonds bill.—Mr. Creevey, mr. Grant
*
833
17. Complaint respecting the Poole Writ.—Chancellor of the exchequer, the speaker, mr. Barham, chancellor of the exchequer, lord Howick, mr. Huskisson lord Ossulston, lord Howick, mr. Sharpe, mr. W. Smith, dr. Laurence, mr. Dent, mr. Jeffery
838
20. Complaint respecting the Poole Writ.—Mr. Barham, the speaker, chancellor of the exchequer, the speaker, mr. Jeffery
845
Poor Relief bill.—Messrs. Morris, Giddy, Whitbread, Rose, Whitbread, Lushington, Simeon
846
21. Papers relating to the Polygars.—Sir T. Turton, mr. R. Dundas, mr. Addington, lord Folkestone, mr. Grant, mr. W. Keene, mr. Wallace
851
Parochial Schools bill.—Messrs. S. Bourne, W. Smith, H. Browne, Wilberforce, Whitbread, Wilberforce, Newport, Rose, Simeon, Lushington, chancellor of the exchequer, P. Carew, Whitbread
853
22. Defence of the Country.—Lord Castlereagh, sir G. Warrender, mr. Yorke, mr. Bathurst, mr. Windham, mr. Herbert, mr. S. Lefevre
860
23. East-India Bonds bill.—Mr. P. Moore, mr. R. Dundas, lord Folkestone, mr. W. Smith, chancellor of the exchequer, mr. Creevey, mr. Grant, dr. Laurence, mr. Whitbread, mr. R. Dundas
907
Irish Insurrection bill.—Mr. Whitbread, sir J. Newport, sir A. Wellesley
909
24. Irish Insurrection bill.—Sir J. Newport, sir A. Wellesley, messrs. Croker, Vereker, Romilly, Vereker, Barry, Laurence, chancellor of the exchequer, Croker, Whitbread, Laing, Croker, Grattan, Beresford, Abercrombie, solicitor-general, Grattan, dr. Laurence, Brand, chancellor of the exchequer, Piggott, attorney-general, Boyle, Whitbread, Newport, Windham, Vereker, solicitor-general, lord H. Petty, lord Milton, chancellor of the exchequer, messrs. Windham, Morris, Newport, Vereker, Phipps, Windham, chancellor of the exchequer, Grattan, Beresford, Loftus, lord Howick, chancellor of the exchequer
911
25. Irish Insurrection bill.—Sir A. Wellesley, sir J. Newport, chancellor of the exchequer, sir J. Newport, col. Vereker, chancellor of the exchequer, sir J. Newport, mr. Foster, chancellor of the exchequer, sir J. Newport, the speaker, sir J. Newport, sir A. Wellesley
942
27. London Port Improvement bill.—Mr. W. Smith, alderman Combe, mr. Hibbert
927
Foreign Treaties and Dispute with America.—Mr. Whitbread, chancellor of the exchequer, mr. Whitbread
929
Militia Transfer bill.—Sir R. Williams, col. Stanley, mr. Willoughby, lord Euston, mr. Lockhart, mr Calcraft, mr. Cripps, col. Wood, mr. Bastard, mr. Fuller, lord Binning, mr. Whitbread, mr. Canning, mr. Addington, lord H. Petty, lord Henniker, chancellor of the exchequer, mr. Windham, mr. Bathurst, lord Castlereagh, dr. Laurence, mr. Windham
931
Irish Insurrection bill.—Messrs. Brand, Whitbread, W. Smith, Newport, Ward, lord Milton, mr. Sheridan, mr. Grattan
969
28. King's Message relating to Engagements with Sweden, &c.—Mr. Canning
972
King's Message respecting a Vote of Credit.—Chancellor of the exchequer
974
*
1807. July 28. Complaint respecting the Poole Writ.—Mr. Jeffery, chancellor of the exchequer, the speaker, chancellor of the exchequer, mr. Barham
974
Militia Transfer bill.—lord Milton, sir T. Turton, col. Wood, mr. W. Smith, secretary at war, mr. Lyttleton, chancellor of the exchequer, lord G. Cavendish, mr. Babington
977
29. Sierra Leone Company bill.—Messrs. Dent, Wilberforce, Eden, Huskisson, Fuller, Sheridan, lord H. Petty, mr. H. Thornton
1001
Complaint respecting the Poole Writ.—Col. Wood, messrs. Fuller, W. Smith, chancellor of the exchequer, Rose, lord H. Petty,
1003
Complaint respecting the Poole Writ.—Col. Wood, messrs. Fuller, W. Smith, chancellor of the exchequer, Rose, lord H. Petty, Barham, P. Carew, Bingham, Lushington, S. Thornton, Windham
1005
Vaccine Inoculation: Reward to Dr. Jenner.—Chancellor of the exchequer, mr. S. Lefevre, lord H. Petty, messrs, Tarleton, S. Bourne, H. Browne, S. Bourne, Morris, Sebright, Herbert, Wilberforce, Windham, chancellor of the exchequer, W. Smith, Whitbread, Fuller
1007
Poor Relief bill.—Messrs. Whitbread, S. Bourne, Whitbread, W. Smith
1015
30. Complaint respecting the Poole Writ.—The speaker
1016
East-India Bonds bill.—Mr. Creevey, mr. R. Dundas, lord Folkestone, gen. Tarleton, mr. Whitbread, mr. Johnstone, mr. Grant
1017
31. Irish Protestant Church.—Sir J. Newport, chancellor of the exchequer
1024
State of Ireland.—Mr. Sheridan, chancellor of the exchequer
1025
Subsidies to Prussia and Sweden, &c.—Mr. Canning, lord H. Petty, lord Castlereagh, messrs. Whitbread, Canning, lord Castlereagh, mr. Windham, solicitor-general for Scotland, secretary at war, general Tarleton, messrs. Calcraft, Rose, Beresford, dr. Laurence
1025
Aug. 3. Publicans' Licence Bill.—Mr. Sheridan, chanc. of the exchequer
1051
Militia Transfer Bill.—Messrs. Frankland, Keene, secretary at war, dr. Laurence, messrs. Wilberforce, Windham, lord Castlereagh
1051
4. Parochial Schools' Bill.—Messrs. Giddy, W. Smith, Carew, Windham, Whitbread, Turton, Macleod, Wilberforce, Grattan, Whitbread
1049
*
Delivery of Writs.—Mr. Barham
1055
*
Irish Arms bill.—Messrs. Whitbread, Herbert, Long, Elliot, Newport, chancellor of the exchequer, Ponsonby, Whitbread, Dillon, Sheridan, Barry, Ponsonby
1057
Militia Transfer bill.—Mr. Windham, lord Castlereagh, mr. Calcraft, the speaker
5. Militia Transfer bill.—Col. Stanley, lord Castlereagh, sir R. Williams, mr. Bankes, lord Folkestone, gen. Loftus, mr. Windham
1061
Militia Completion bill.—Mr.P.Carew, lord Castlereagh, mr. Sheridan
1066
6. Relief of Beneficed Clergy.—Mr. Lockhart, chancellor of the exchequer
1067
Election Recognizance bill.—Mr. Dent, mr. Rose
1068
7. East-India Budget.—Mr. R. Dundas, mr. Creevey
1069
Assessed Taxes bill.—Chancellor of the exchequer, messrs. Barham, Smith, Huskisson, Moore, Turton, Whitbread, Laurence, lord H. Petty
1070
Offices in Reversion.—Mr. Bankes
1073
Consolidated Fund bill: General State of Affairs.—Mr. Whitbread chancellor of the exchequer, lord H. Petty, lord Castlereagh, mr. Windham, mr. Canning, mr. Windham, dr. Laurence, sir T. Turton, mr. Hibbert, mr. Rose, messrs. Ward, W. Smith, Whitbread, Canning, lord H. Petty, chancellor of the exchequer, lord Folkestone
1073
Irish Arms bill.—Lord Milton, messrs. Lushington, Moore, Whitbread, sir A. Piggott, messrs. Dillon, Craig, Ponsonby, Sheridan, lord H. Petty, chancellor of the exchequer, messrs. Sheridan, Elliott, Wilberforce, Windham
1086
8. Publicans' Licence bill.—Messrs. Sheridan, chancellor of the exchequer, Rose, Giddy, Moore, S. Bourne, Sheridan
1098
10. West-India Colonies.—Messrs, Ellis, chancellor of the exchequer, Lushington, Hibbert
1151
Committee of Finance.—Mr. Bankes
1154
Offices in Reversion.—Messrs. Bankes, Ward, chancellor of the exchequer, Bouverie, lord H. Petty, sir J. Sebright, mr. Whitbread
1158
1807. Aug.10. General State of Affairs.—Mr.Whitbread, mr. Canning, mr. Whitbread
1169
13. State of Ireland.—Messrs. Sheridan, chanc. of the excheq., Grattan, Dillon, Windham, lord W. Russell, messrs. Lockhart, Herbert, Sheridan
1185
Propositions respecting the State of the Army
1211
PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS, PETITIONS, PROTESTS, REPORTS, LISTS, &c.
PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.
King's Message respecting the Office of the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster
282
King's Message relative to Sweden, &c.
972
King's Message respecting a Vote of Credit
974
Lords Commissioners' Speech at the Close of the Session, April 27, 1807
552
Lords Commissioners' Speech on Opening the First Session of the New Parliament, June 26, 1807
577
Lords Commissioners' Speech at the Close of the Session, August 14, 1807
1221
Propositions respecting the State of the Army
1216
FINANCE.—Great Britain.
Account of the Amount of all Exemptions granted to Foreigners, in respect of the Duty on Dividends, in the various Funds of Great Britain
App. p. i
Abstract Statement of the Public Income of Great Britain, for the year ended 5th January, 1807
v
Account of the Consolidated Fund of Great Britain, for the year ended 5th Jan. 1807
vii
Account of the Net Produce of the Permanent and the War Taxes for ditto
xi
Account of the Value of all Imports and Exports for 18 Years
xv
Account of the Public Expenditure of Great Britain, for the year ended the 5th of January, 1807
xvii
Account of the Monies paid out of the Receipt of his Majesty's Exchequer in the year ended the 5th January, 1807, towards satisfying the Charges of the Public Funded Debt of Great Britain, Ireland and Imperial Loans
xix
Account of the Total Amount of the Sums actually received by the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, in the year ending the 5th of Jan. 1807
xix
Account of the Interest paid on Exchequer Bills, from 5th of Jan. 1804, to 1807
xxiii
Account of the Charges upon the Consolidated Fund of Great Britain, in the year ending the 5th of January, 1807
xxi
Account of the Amount of Bounties paid in England and Scotland, and of the Revenues of Customs and Excise, between 5th Jan. 1806, and 1807
xxiii
Account of Pensions and Parliamentary Grants, for the year ending 5th Jan. 1807
xxiii
Account, shewing the Amount of Monies received from his Majesty's Exchequer for Naval Services, between 5th January 1806 and 5th January 1807
xxv
Account of Monies paid by the Office of Ordnance in the year 1806
xxvii
Account of the Miscellaneous Services for the year ending on 5th January, 1807
xxix
Account of the Unfunded Debt and Demands outstanding on 5th January, 1807
xxxiii
Account of the Progress made in the Redemption of the Public Funded Debt of Great Britain, at 1st of February, 1807
xxxv
Account of the Progress made in the Redemption of the Public Funded Debt of Ireland funded in Great Britain, 1st Feb. 1807
xxxv
Account of the Progress made in the Redemption of the Imperial Debt, 1st Feb. 1807
xxxvii
Account of the Amount of the Notes of the Bank of England and Ireland in Circulation from Feb. 1, 1806, to Feb. 1, 1807
xxxiii
FINANCE.—Ireland.
Abstract Statement of the Public Income of Ireland for the year ended 5th Jan. 1807
xxxix
Account of the Consolidated Fund of Ireland for the year ended 5th January, 1807
xliii
Account of the Public Expenditure of Ireland, for the year ending 5th Jan. 1807
xlv
Account of the Monies, paid out of the Exchequer, in the year ending 5th Jan. 1807, towards satisfying the charge of the Public Funded Debt of Ireland
xlvii
Account of the Sums actually received by the commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt of Ireland, in the year ending 5th January, 1807
xlvii
Account of the Interest on Exchequer Bills of Ireland, with the Payments made fom 5th January 1806, to 5th January 1807
xlvii
Account of Payments made for Purposes appointed by the Parliament of Ireland prior to the union, in the year ending 5th Jan. 1807
xlvii
Account of Payments made from the Funds appropriated for Local Purposes in Ireland, from 5th January 1806, to 5th January 1807
xlix
Account of Payments in the year to the 5th January 1807, under the several heads of Civil Lists, Pensions, and other Permanent Charges
xlix
Account of the. Amount of Bounties paid out of the Public Revenue of Ireland, in the year ending 5th January 1807
xlix
Account of the Amount of Payments to the Militia, Army of Reserve, &c. of Ireland, in the year ending 5th January 1807
xlix
Account of the Monies paid to the Office of Ordnance of Ireland, in the year to the 5th January 1807
Account of Monies paid on account of his Majesty's Forces in Ireland, in the year ending 5th January 1807
li
Account, shewing the Payments in the year ending 5th January 1807, for Miscellaneous Services in Ireland
li
Account of the Amount of Payments from the Vote of Credit, in the year ending 5th January 1807
li
Account of the Value of all Imports into and all Exports from Ireland, for the year ending 5th Jan. 1807
li
Account of the Number of Vessels, with the Amount of their Tonnage, which have been built and registered in the several ports of Ireland, between 5th January 1806, and 5th January 1807
li
Account of the Number of Vessels, with the Amount of their Tonnage, and Number of Men and Boys actually employed in navigating the same, which belonged to the several ports of Ireland, on 30th Sept. 1807
li
Account of the Public Funded Debt of Ireland, on 5th Jan. 1807
lv
Account of the Unfunded Debt of Ireland, on 5th Jan. 1807
liii
Account, shewing how the Monies granted for the Service of the year 1807, for Ireland have been disposed of
lix
PETITIONS.
Petition from the hon. Cochrane Johnstone
70
Petition from the West-India Planters against the Slave-Trade Abolition bill
85
Petition from the Liverpool Planters on the State of the Sugar Trade
140
Petition from the University of Oxford against the Roman Catholic Army and Navy Service bill
141
Petition from Mr. John Palmer
220
Petition againt Mr. Galway Mills
733
Petition of Dr. Highmore
1154
PROTESTS.
Protest against the American Indemnity bill
998
Protest against the Rejection of the Offices in Reversion bill
1060
REPORTS.
Report (First) of the Committee of Finance—Pay-Office
App. p. lxvii
Report (Second) of the Committee of Finance—Bank of England
lxxxvii
Report of the Committee of the House of Commons on the Commercial State of the West-India Colonies
lxxx
LISTS
List of his Majesty's Ministers, as it stood in March 1807
xii
List of his Majesty's Ministers, as it stood in April 1807
xii
List of the House of Commons, as it stood at the opening of the First Session of the New Parliament, June 22, 1807
xiii
List of the Minority on Mr. Brand's Motion relative to the Change of Administration
348
List of the Minority on the Marquis of Stafford's Motio relative to ditto
422
List of the Minority in the Lords, June 26, on the Address
607
List of the Minority in the Commons, June 26, on the Address
658
List of the Minority on Mr. Whitbread's Motion upon the State of the Nation
742
List of the Minority on Lord Cochrane's Motion relative to Places, Pensions, &c.
739
*
List of the Minority in the House of Commons on the Irish Arms bill
1098
List of the Minority on Mr. Sheridan's Motion relative to the State of Ireland
1216
List of Public Acts passed in the First and only Session of the Third Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland
553
List of Public Acts passed in the First Session of the Fourth Parliament of Great Britain and Ireland
1228
LIST Or HIS MAJESTY'S MINISTERS, AS IT STOOD IN MARCH, 1807
Cabinet Ministers.
Viscount Sidmouth
President of the Council.
Lord Frskine
Lord high Chancellor.
Lord Holland
Lord Privy Seal.
Lord Grenville
First Lord of the Treasury (Prime Minister).
Right Hon. Thomas Grenville
First Lord of the Admiralty.
Earl of Moira
Master-general of the Ordnance.
Earl Spencer
Secretary of State for the Home Department.
Lord Howick
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
Right Hon. Windham
Secretary of State for the Department of War and the Colonies.
lord Ellenborough
Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench.
Lord Henry Petty
Chancellor and Under-Treasurer of the Exchequer.
Earl Fitzwilliam
(A Seat without an Office).
Not of the Cabinet.
Right Hon. George Tierney
President of the Board of Controul for the Affairs of India.
Earl of Derby
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.
Lord Auckland
President of the Board of Trade.
Right Hon. Richard Fitzpatrick
Secretary at War.
Right Hon. Richard Brinsley Sheridan
Treasurer of the Navy.
Earl Temple
Joint Paymaster-general.
Lord John Townshend
Earl of Buckinghamshire
Joint Postmaster-general.
Earl of Carysfort
Right Hon. Nicholas Vansittart
Secretaries of the Treasury
William Henry Fremantle, Esq.
Sir William Grant
Master of the Rolls.
Sir Arthur Piggott
Attorney-General.
Sir Samuel Romilly
Solicitor-General.
PERSONS IN THE MINISTRY OF IRELAND.
His Grace the Duke of Bedford
Lord Lieutenant.
Right Hon. George Ponsonby
Lord High Chancellor.
Right Hon. William Elliot
Chief Secretary.
Right Hon. Sir John Newport
Chancellor of the Exchequer.
LIST OF HIS MAJESTY'S MINISTERS, AS IT STOOD IN APRIL, 1807.
Cabinet Ministers.
Earl Camden
President of the Council.
Lord Eldon
Lord High Chancellor.
Earl of Westmoreland
Lord Privy Seal.
Duke of Portland
First Lord of the Treasury (Prime Minister).
Lord Mulgrave
First Lord of the Admiralty.
Earl of Chatham
Master-general of the Ordnance.
Earl Bathurst
President of the Board of Trade.
Lord Hawkesbury
Secretary of State for the Home Department.
Right Hon. George Canning
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
Lord Castlereagh
Secretary of State for the Department of War and the Colonies.
Right Hon. Spencer Perceval
Chancellor and Under-Treasurer of the Exchequer, and also Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.
Not of the Cabinet.
Right Hon. Robert Saunders Dundas
President of the Board of Controul for the Affairs of India.
Right Hon. George Rose
Vice-President of the Board of Trade, and Treasurer of the Navy.
Sir James Pulteney, Bart.
Secretary at War.
Lord Charles somerset
Joint Paymaster-general.
Right Hon. Charles Long
Earl of Chichester
Joint Postmaster-general.
Earl of Sandwich
William Huskisson, Esq.
Secretaries of the Treasury.
Hon. Henry Wellesley
Sir William Grant
Master of the Rolls.
Sir Vicary Gibbs
Attorney-General.
Sir Thomas Plomer
Solicitor-General.
PERSONS IN THE MINISTRY OF IRELAND.
Duke of Richmond
Lord Lieutenant.
Lord Manners
Lord High Chancellor.
Sir Arthur Wellesley
Chief Secretary.
Right Hon. John Foster
Chancellor of the Exchequer.
AN ALPHABETICAL LIST OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS:
AS RETURNED FOR THE NEW PARLIAMENT,
Which met on the 22d of June, 1807.
Abbot, right honourable Charles,
Bernard, viscount, Corkeshire
Canning, right hon. George,
Speaker, Oxford University
Bernard, Scrope, St. Mawes
Hastings
Abercomby, honourable Geo.,
Bernard, T., jun., King's county
Canning, George, Sligo borough
Kinross shire
Bertie, Albemarle, Stamford
Carew, right hon. R. Pole, Fewey
Abercromby, hon. J., Midhurst
Bewicke, Calv., Winchelsea
Carew, Robert Shapland, Wex-
Adair, Robert, Camelford
Biddulph, Robert Myddelton,
ford county
Adam, William Kinross-shire
Denbigh borough
Cartwright, William Ralph,
Adams,Charles, Weymouth,&c.
Binning, lord, Cockermouth
Northampton county
Adams, William, Totness
Blackburne, J., Lancashire
Castlereagh, lord visct., Plymp-
Addington, right honourable
Bligh, Thomas, Meathshire
ton Earle
John Hiley, Harwich
Boddington, Samuel, Tralee
Cavendish, lord G. A. H., Derby
Agar, Eman. Felix, Sudbury
Bond, right hon. Nathanael,
county
Allan, Alexander, Berwick
Corfe Castle
Cavendish, G. H. Compton,
Althorp, visct., Northampton-
Bonham, Henry, Leominster
Aylesbury
shire
Bootle, Edward Wilbraham,
Cavendish, Wm., Derby borough
Anorews, Miles Peter, Bewdley
Newcastle-under-Lyme
Chaplin, C., Lincoln county
Anson, George, Litchfield
Boscawen, hon. Edw., Truro
Cheesement, John, Wootton
Anstruther, right honourable
Bouverie, hon. B., Downton
Basset
sir John, bart.; Anstruther
Bouverie, honourable Edward,
Cholmondeley, Thomas, Ches
Antonie, William Lee, Bedford
Northampton borough
ter county
borough
Bowyer, sir George, bart.;
Chute, Wm., Hampshire
Archdall, M., Fermanaghshire
Malmesbury
Clancarty, earl of, Rye
Ashburnham, Geo New Romney
Boyle, lord visct., Corke county
Clements, Henry John, Leitrim
Ashley, hon. Cropley, Dorchester
Bradshaw, hon. A. C., Honiton
Clinton, W.H., Boroughbridge
Astley, sir J. H. bart; Norfolk
Bradshaw,R. Haldane, Brackley
Clive, lord viscount, Ludlow
Aubrey, sir J. bart; Aldeburgh
Brand, hon. Th., Hertfordshire
Clive, Henry, Ludlow
Babington, Thomas, Leicester
Brandling, Charles John, New-
Clive, Wm., Bishop's Castle
borough
castle-upon-Tyne
Clonmel, earl of, New Romney
Bagenal, W., Catherloghshire
Brodrick, hon. W., Whitchurch
Cochrane, lord, Westminster
Bagot, hon. C., Castle Riding
Brogden, James, Launceston
Cochrane, hon. G. A., Gram-
Bagwell, William, Clonmell
Brooke, H. V., Donegalshire
pound
Baillie, Evan, Bristol
Brooke, lord, Warwick borough
Cochrane, Johnstone, hon. An-
Baillie, George, jun., Berwick
Browne, Anthony, Heydon
drew, Grampound
shire
Browne, right hon. Denis, Mayo
Cockerel, Charles, Lestwithiel
Baillie Peter, jun.
Browne, Is. Hawk., Bridgenorth
Cocks, hon. Edw. C.; Ryegate
Baker, John, Canterbury
Brownlow, Wm., Armaghshire
Codrington, Chris. Tewkesbury
Bampfylde, sir Charles W. bart.;
Bruce, lord, Marlborough
Coke, Daniel Parker, Notting-
Exeter
Buller, Edward, East Looe
ham town
Bankes, Henry, Corfe Castle
Buller, James, Exeter
Coke, Edward, Norfolk
Barham, Jos. F., Stockbridge
Buller, James, West Looe
Coke, Thos. William, Norfolk
Baring, Alexander, Taunton
Bullock, John, Essex
Colclough, J., Wexford county
Baring, T., Chipping Wycombe
Bunbury, sir T.C., bart.; Suffolk
Cole, hon. Galb. L., Fermanagh
Barlow, Hugh, Pembroke
Burdett, sir Fran., bart.; West-
Colquhoun, Archibald, Cullen
Barne, Snowdon, Dunwich
minster
Combe, Harvey Chris., London
Barry, John, Max., Cavanshire
Burghersh, lord, Lyme Regis
Cooper, Edw. S., Sligo county
Bastard, Edmund, Dartmouth
Burrell, sir Charles Mer., bart.;
Cornwallis, hon. William, Eye
Bastard, John Pol., Devonshire
New Shoreham
Cotes, John, Shropshire
Bathurst, right hon. Charles B.,
Burton, Francis, Oxford city
Cotterell, sir John Geers, bart.;
Bristol
Burton, hon. F. Nath., Clareshire
Hereford county
Beach, Mich. Hicks, Cirencester
Butler, hon. Charles Harwood,
Cotton, Stapleton, Newark
Beaumont, Thomas Richard,
Kilkenny county
Cowper, hon. E. Spencer, Hert-
Northumberland
Butler, hon.J., Kilkenny country
ford borough
Beckford, William, Hindon
Byng, George, Middlesex
Creevey, Thomas, Thetford
Bennett, Richard Henry Alex-
Calcraft, John, Rochester
Crickett, R. Alex., Ipswich
ander, Enniskillen
Calcraft., sir G. T., Wareham
Cripps, Joseph, Cirencester
Bentinck, lord C., Ashburton
Calvert, J., Huntingdon borough
Croker, J. W., Downpatrick
Benyon, Richard, Wallingford
Calvert, N., Herford borough
Curtis, sir Wm., bart.; London
Beresford, lord George Thomas,
Campbell, Alex., Dumfermlin
Curwen, John Chris., Carlisle
Londonderryshire
Campbell, Archib., Glasgow
Curzon, hon. Robert, Clitherow
Beresford, John Claudius, Wa-
Campbell, George, Carmar-
Cust, hon. John, Clitherow
terford county
then borough
Cuthbert, J. R., Appleby
Berkeley, honourable George
Campbell, J. jun., Rothsay
Daly, right honourable Denis
Cranfield, Gloucester county
Campbell, lord J., Argyll-shire
Bowes, Galway county
Daly, James, Galway town
Foster, right hon. John, Louth
Holford, George, Lestwithiel
Daniell, Ralph Allen,West Looe
Foster, hon. T. H., Drogheda
Holland, sir Nath. Dance, bart.;
Dashwood, Sir Henry Watkin,
Foster, J.L, Dublin University
East Grinstead
bart.; Woodstock
Frankland, Wm., Thirsk
Honywood, William, Kent
Davenport, Davies, Chester
Fremantle, T. F., Saltash
Hood, sir Samuel, K.B. K. M.
county
Fremantle, Wm. Hen., Saltash
& K.F., Bridport
Davies, R. H., Colchester
French, Arthur, Roscommon
Hope, hon. A., Linlithgowshire
Dawkins, James, Chippenham
Fuller, John, Sussex
Hope, hon. C., Haddingtonshire
Dawson, Richard, Monaghan
Fydell, Thomas, Boston
Hope, W. J., Dumfries-shire
Deede, William, Hythe
Fynes, Henry; Aldborough,
Horrocks, Samuel, Preston
Dennison, John, Minehead
Yorkshire
Howard, Henry, Gloucester city
Dent, John, Lancaster borough
Gamon, sir R., bart.; Winchester
Howard, hon. Wm., Morpeth
Dick, Quinton, Carricfergus
Garland, George, Poole
Howick, viscount, Appleby
Dickinson, Wm., Somersetshire
Garrow, William, Callington
Hughes, Wm. L., Wallingford
Dillon, hon. Henry Aug., Mayo
Gascoyne, Isaac, Liverpool
Hume, sir Abr., bart.; Hastings
Disbrowe, Edward, Windsor
Gell, Philip, Malmesbury
Hume, Wm. Hare, Wicklow
Drake, T. D. Tyrwhitt, Agmon-
Gibbs, sir Vicary, knt.; Camb.
Hunt, Joseph, Queenborough
desham
University
Huntingfield, lord, Dunwich
Dugdale, Dug. Stratford, Warwick
Giddy, Davies, Bodmyn
Hurst, Robert., Steyning
county
Gipps, George, Ripon
Huskisson, William, Harwich
Duigenan, P., Armagh borough
Glassford, Henry, Dumbarton
Hussey, William, New Sarum
Dundas, Charles, Berks.
shire
Hutchinson, hon. C.H., Cork city
Dundas, honourable Charles Lau.,
Goddard, Thomas, Cricklade
Jackson, John, Dover
Richmond
Godfrey,Thomas, Hythe
Jackson, Josias, Southampton
Dundas, hon. Laurence, Malton
Gooch, Thos. Sherlock, Suffolk
Jeffery, John, Poole
Dundas, hon. R., Edinburgh-shire
Gordon, Williams, Worcester
Jekyll, Joseph, Calne
Dundas, right hon. Wiliam,
Gore, hon. W. J., Leitrimshire
Jenkinson, Charles, Dover
Sutherland-shire
Gower, lord Gran. Leveson,
Jenkinson, hon. C. C., Sandwich
Dupre, James, Chichester
Stafford county
Jephson, Denham, Mallow
Eden, hon. W. F. E., Woodstock
Graham, James, Cockermouth
Jervoise, J.C., Yarmouth, Hants
Egerton, John, Chester
Grant, Charles, Inverness-shire
Ingilby, William, Retford
Eliot, hon. William, Liskeard
Grant, Francis Wm., Elginshire
Jocelyn, lord viscount, Louth
Ellice, Wm., Great Grimsby
Grant, right honourable sir
Jodrell, Henry, Bramber
Elliott, right honourable William,
William, knt.; Bamff-shire
Johnes, Thos, Cardigan county
Peterborough
Grattan, rt hon. H., Dublin city
Johnstone, hon. A., Grampound
Ellis, C. R., East Grinstead
Greenhill, Robert, Thirsk
Johnstone, George, Heydon
Ellison, Richard, Lincoln city
Greenough, G. B., Gatton
Jolliffe, Hylton, Petersfield
Elphinstone-Fleming, hon. C.,
Grenfell, Pascoe, Great Marlow
Jones, Gilbert, Aldborough,
Stirlingshire
Grenville, right hon. Thomas,
Yorkshire
Estcourt, T. Grimston, Devizes
Buckingham borough
Jones, Thomas, Shrewsbury
Everett, Thomas, Ludgershall
Grey, hon. Booth, Petersfield
Jones, Walter, Coleraine
Euston, earl of, Cambridge
Grimston, hon. J.W., St. Albans
Irving, John, Bramber
University
Grosvenor, Thomas, Chester city
Keck, G. A. L., Leicester county
Eyre, Anthony Hardolph, Not-
Guernsey, Lord, Weobly
Keene, W., Montgomery borough
tingham county
Hall, Benjamin, Totness
Kemp, Thomas, Lewes
Fane, Henry, Lyme Regis
Halsey, Joseph, St. Albans
Kenrick, William, Blechingly
Fane, John, Oxford county
Hamilton, viscount, Dungannon
Kensington, lord, Haverfordwest
Farmer, Wm. M., Huntingdon
Hamilton, lord A., Lanerkshire
King, sir John Dashwood, bart.;
Fellowes, hon. Newton, Andover
Hamilton, sir C. bart.; Honiton
Chipping-Wycombe
Fellowes, William Henry, Hun-
Hamilton, Hans, Dublin county
Kingston, John, Lymington
tingdon borough
Hammet, John, Taunton
Knatchbull, sir Edward, bart.;
Ferguson, James, Aberdeenshire
Harborad, honourable Edward;
Kent
Ferguson, R. C., Kirkaldy
Yarmouth, Norfolk
Knox, honourable George, Dub-
Fetherstone, sir T. bart.; Longford
Harboard, hon. W. A., Plympton
lin University
Finch, hon. Edward, Cambridge
Harvey, Eliab, Essex
Knox, hon. Thomas, Tyrone
town
Hawkins, Hen., Boroughbridge
Kynaston Powell, J., Shropshire
Fitzgerald, right hon.Jas., Ennis
Headley, lord, Malton
Laing, Malcolm, Orkney shire
Fitzgerald, right hon. M., Kerry
Heathcote, Thos., Blechingley
Lambton, R. J., Durham city
Fitzgerald, lord H., Kildareshire
Henderson, Anthony, Brackley
Lascelles, hon. E., Northallerton
Fitzharris, viscount, Heytesbury
Henniker, lord, Rutland
Latouche, D.,Catherlogh county
Fitzhugh, William, Tiverton
Herbert, hon. Charles, Wilton
Latouche, J. jun., Leitrimshire
Fitzpatrick, right honourable
Herbert, Henry Arthur, Kerry
Latouche, Robert, Kildare
Richard, Bedfordshire
Herbert, hon. Wm., Hants
Laurence, F., Peterborough
Fitzroy, lord Charles, Bury St.
Heron, Peter; Newton, Lanc.
Leach, John, Seaford
Edmunds
Hibbert, George, Seaford
Lefevre, Charles Shaw, Reading
Fitzroy, lord William, Thetford
Hill, sir George Fitzgerald, bart.;
Leigh, Charles, New Ross
Foley, hon. Andrew, Droitwich
Londonderry city
Leigh, Jas. Hen., Great Bedwin
Foley, Thomas, Herefordshire
Hill, hon. Wm., Shrewsbury
Leigh, Robert Holt, Wigan
Folkes, sir Martin Browne, bart.;
Hinchingbrook, lord viscount,
Leland, John, Stamford
King's Lynn
Huntingdon county
Lemon, Charles, Penryn
Folkestone, lord viscount, New
Hippisley, sir J.C.bart.; Sudbury
Lemon, John, Truro
Sarum
Hobhouse, Benjamin, Hindon
Lemon, sir. Wm. bart.; Cornwall
Forbes, lord visct., Longford
Hodson, John, Wigan
Leslie, Ch. Powell, Monaghan
Forester, Cecil, Wenlock
Holdsworth, A. H., Dartmouth
Lethbridge, T. Buckler, Somerset
Leycester, Hugh, Milborne Port
Milnes, Robert Pemberton,
Perceval, honourable Spencer,
Littleton, sir Edward, bart.;
Pontefract
Northampton borough
Stafford county
Milton, lord visct.; Yorkshire
Percy, earl, Northumberland
Lloyd, James Martin, Steyning
Monckton, honourable Edward,
Percy, hon. J., Beeralston
Lockhart, sir A. M., Berwick
Stafford borough
Petty, lord Henry, Camelford
Lockhart, J. I., Oxford city
Monson, honourable William,
Philipps, R. M., Stafford borough
Lockhart Wm. E., Selkirk-shire
Lincoln city
Phipps, hon. Edm., Scarborough
Loftus, William, Tamworth
Montagu, Matt., St. Germans
Piggott, sir Arthur, Arundel
Long, right hon. C., Haslemere
Montgomery, hon. Conyngham,
Pitt, Wm. Morton, Dorsetshire
Long, Richard, Wilts
St. Michael
Plomer, sir. T., knt., Downton
Longfield, Mountifort, Corkcity
Montgomery, right hon. sir
Plunkett, Wm. C., Midhurst
Longman, George, Maidstone
James, bart.; Peebles-shire
Pochin, Charles, Enniskillen
Lopez, sir M. M. bart., Evesham
Moore, Charles, Heytesbury
Pocock, George, Bridgewater
Lovaine, lord, Beeraiston
Moore, lord Henry, Orford
Pole, sir Charles Morice, bart.;
Loveden, Edw. L., Shaftesbury
Moore, Peter, coventry
Plymouth
Lowther, James, Westmorland
Mordaunt, C., Warwick county
Pole, hon. W.W., Queen's County
Lowther, John Cumberland,
Morgan, C., Monmouth county
Pollington, visct., Pontefract
Cockermouth
Morpeth, lord viscount, Cum-
Ponsonby, hon. Frederick, Kil-
Lubbock, sir John, bart.; Leo-
be land
kenny county
minster
Morris, Edw, Newport, Cornwall
Ponsonby honourable George,
Lushington, Stephen, Yar-
Morris, Robert, Gloucester city
Corke county
mouth, Norfolk
Mozsey, sir Oswell, bart.; Port
Popham, sir H. K. M., Ipswich
Luttrell, J. F. Wnes, Minehead
anlington
Porcher, J. D., Old Sarum
Lygon. hon. Wm. B., Worcester
Mostyn, sir Thomas, bart.;
Porchester, lord, Cricklade
county
Flint county
Porter, George, Stockbridge
Lyttleton, hon. William Henry,
Muncaster, lord, Westmorland
Portman, Edw. Berk., Dorset
Worcester county
Mundy, E. M, Derby county
Poulett, hon. W. P., Yarmouth
Macdonald, james, Newcastle
Murray, lord James, Perthshire
Power, R., Waterford county
under-Lyme
Murray, John, Wootton-Basset
Praed, William, Banbury
Macdowall, Wm., Renfrewshire
Murray, sir Patrick, bart.;
Price, sir Charles, bart.; London
Mackenzie, F. A., Ross-shire
Edinburgh city
Price, Richard, New Radnor
Mackenzie, J. R., Dornoc
Needham, hon. Fran., Newry
Primrose, lord visct., Cashell
Macleod, R. B. Æ., Cromarty-
Nepean, right honourable sir
Prittie, hon. F. A., Tipperary
shire
Evan, bart.; Bridport
Pulteney, sir J., bart.; Wey-
M'Mahon. John, Aldeburgh
Neville, hon. Richard, Buck-
mouth and Melcombe Regis
Macnaghten, Edm. A., Antrim
ingham
Pym, Francis, Bedford county
Madocks, Wm. Alex., Boston
Newark, lord viscount, Not-
Guin, hon.W.H., Limerickshire
Magens, Mag. D., Ludgershall
tingham county
Raine, Jonathan, Wareham
Mahon, hon. S., Roscommon
Newborough, lord, Beaumaris
Rainier, Peter, Sandwich
Mahon, lord visct., Wendover
Newport, right hon. sir J., bart.;
Ramsbottom, Rich,. Windsor
Maitland, Eben., Lestwithiel
St. Mawes, Waterford city
Rancliffe, lord, Minehead
Maitland, John, Chippenham
Nicholl, sir John, knt., Bedwin
Rendlesham, lord, Bossiney
Manners, lord Charles Som.,
Noel, Gerard Noel, Rutland
Richards, Richard, Hellestone
Cambridge county
North, Dudley, Banbury
Richardson, Wm., Armaghshire
Manners, lord Robert, Lei-
Northey, W.; Newport, Cornwall
Ridley, sir Matthew White, bart.;
cester county
Norton, hon. J. C., Guildford
Newcastle upon-Tyne
Manners, Robert, Cambridge
Nugent, sir Geo., Aylesbury
Robarts, Abr., Worcester city
town
O'Brien, sir Edw., bart.; Clare
Robinson, John, Bishops Castle
Manning, William, Evesham
O'Callaghan, James, Tregory
Robinson, hon. Fred., Ripon
Markham, John, Portsmouth
Odell, Wm., Limerick county
Rochfort, Gustavus, Westmeath
Martin, Henry, Kinsale
Oglander, sir W. bart.; Bodmyn
Romilly, sir S. knt., Horsham
Martin, Rich., Galway county
O'Hara, Charles, Sligo county
Rose, right hon. G., Christchurch
Mathew, honourable Montagu,
O'Neill, hon. John, Antrim
Rose, Geo. Hen., Southampton
Tipperary
Onslow, hon. T. Cranley,
Royston, lord visct.; Reigate
Maule, hon. Wm., Forfarshire
Guildford
Russell, lord Wm., Tavistock
Maxwell, sir J. S. H., Annan
Ord, William, Morpeth
Rutherford, J., Roxburgh-shire
Maxwell, William, Selkirk
Ossulston, lord, Knaresborough
Ryder, hon. Richard, Tiverton
Maxwell, W. jun., Wigtownshire
Paget, hon. B., Angleseyshire
St. Aubyn, Sir John, Helston
May, Edward, Belfast
Paget, lord, Milborne Port
Salusbury, sir Robert, bart.;
Meade, hon. John, Downshire
Paget, hon. Charles, Carnarvon
Brecon borough
Mellish, William, Middlesex
borough
Savage, Francis, Downshire
Milbanke, sir Ralph, bart.; Dur-
Palk, sir Laurence, bart.; Devon
Saville, Albany, Okehampton
ham county
Palk, Walter, Ashburton
Scott, right hon. sir William,
Mildmay, sir H. P. S., bart.;
Palmer, John, Bath
Oxford University
Hampshire
Palmerston, lord visct.; New-
Scudamore, R. P., Hereford city
Mildmay, H. C. St. John, Win-
port, Isle of Wight
Sebright, sir J. S., Hertfordshire
chester
Parnell, Henry, Queen's County
Seymour, lord R., Carmarthen
Milford, lord, Pembroke county
Parry, Love, Horsham
Shakespeare, Arthur, Richmond
Miller, sir Thomas, bart.;
Patten, Peter, Lancaster
Sharp, Richard, Castle Rising
Portsmouth
Patteson, John, Norwich
Shaw, James, London
Mills, Chas., Warwick borough
Peele, sir R., bart.; Tamworth
Shaw, Robert, Dublin city
Mills, William, Coventry
Peirse, Henry, Northallerton
Sheldon, Ralph, Wilton
Milner, Sir William Mordaunt,
Pelham, hon. C. A., Lincoln-
Shelley, Henry, Lewes
bart.; York city
shire
Shelley, Tim., New Shoreham
Sheridan, right hon. Richard
Swann, Henry, Penryn
Wallace, right hon. Thomas,
Brinsley, Ilchester
Sykes, sir M. M., bart.; York
Shaftesbury
Shipley, William, Flint
Symonds, T. P., Hereford city
Walpole, hon. G., Dungarvan
Simeon, John, Reading
Talbot, R. W., Dublinshire
Walpole, lord, King's Lynn
Simpson, hon John, Wenlock
Tarleton, Banastre, Liverpool
Ward, hon. J. W., Wareham
Simson, George, Maidstone
Taylor, Charles William, Wells
Ward, Robert, Haslemere
Sinclair, sir J., bart.; Buteshire
Taylor, Edward, Canterbury
Wardell, Lloyd, Okehampton
Singleton, Mark, Eye
Taylor, M. A., Ivelchester
Warrander, sir George, bart.;
Smith, George, Wendover
Taylor, William, Barnstaple
Jedburgh
Smith, Henry, Calne
Tempest, sir H. V., bart.; Dur-
Wedderburn, sir David, bart.;
Smith, John, Nottingham town
ham city
St. Andrew's
Smith, Joshua, Devizes
Temple, earl, Bucks
Welby, Wm. earl, Grantham
Smith, Sam., Leicester borough
Templetown, lord, visct.; Bury
Wellesley, right hon. sir A.,
Smith, Thos. Aston, Andover
St. Edmunds
K. B., St. Michael
Smith, William, Norwich
Thellusson, George Woodford,
Wellesley, hon. Henry, Eye
Smyth William, Westmeath
Barnstaple
Wemyss, William, Fif
Sneyd, Nathanael, Cavan
Thomas, George, Chichester
Wentworth, Godfrey, Fregony
Somerset, lord A. J. H., Mon
Thompson, sir T. B. bart., Ro-
Western, Cha. Cailis, Malden
mouth county
chester
Wharton, John, Beverley
Somerset, lord Charles Henry,
Thornton, Henry, Southwark
Wharton, Rich., Durham city
Monmouth borough
Thornton, Robert, Colchester
Whitbread, S., Bedford borough
Somerset, lord R. E. H., Glou-
Thornton, Samuel, Surry
Whitmore, Thos., Bridgnorth
cester county
Thornton, Thomas, Grantham
Wickham, right hon. William,
Somerville, sir M., bart; Meath
Thornton, Wm., Bridgewater
Callington
Spencer, lord Francis Almarick,
Thynne, lord George, Weobly
Wigram, sir Robert, bart.;
Oxford county
Thynne, lord John, Bath
Wexford town
Stanhope, Walter S., Carlisle
Tighe, William, Wicklow
Wigram, Robert, Fowey
Staniforth, John, Kingston-upon-
Titchfield, marquis of, Bucks.
Wilberforce, Wm., York county
Hull
Townshend, lord John, Knares-
Wilder, Francis John, Arundel
Stanley, Lord, Preston
borough
Wilkins, Walter, Radnor county
Stanley, Thos. Lancaster county
Townshend, hon. W. Aug.,
Williams, Owen, Great Mar
Stephens, Samuel, St. Ives
Whitchurch
Williams, sir Robert, bart.;
Steward, Gab. Tuck., Weymouth
Tracy, H., Tewkesbury
Carnarvon county
and Melcombe Regis
Tremayne, Jno. H., Cornwall
Williams, Robert, Dorchester
Steward, Richard Tucker, Wey-
Trevanion, John, Penrya
Willoughby, Henry, Newark
mouth, and Melcombe Regis
Tudway, Clement, Wells
Windham, right hon. William,
Stewart, hon. Charles William,
Turtun, sir Thomas, bart.;
Romney
Londonderry county
Southwark
Winnington, sir T. E. Droitwich
Stewart, hon. Edward Richard,
Tyrwhit-Drake, Thomas Drake,
Wood, Mark, Gatton
Stanraer
Agmondesham
Wood, Thomas, Brecon county
Stewart, sir J., bart.; Donegal
Tyrwhitt, Thomas, Plymouth
Wyndham, hon. C. W., Sussex
Stewart, James, Tyroneshire
Vane, sir Frederick Fletcher,
Wyndham, Hon. Penrud., Wilts
Stewart, hon. Mo. Gr. J., Stew-
bart.; Winchelsea
Wyndham, Thos., Glamorgan
artry of Kircudbright
Vansittart, George, Berks.
Wynn, Charles W. Williams,
Stopford, visct., Marlborough
Vansittart, right hon. Nicho-
Montgomery county
Stirling, sir W., bart.; St. Ives
las, Old Sarum
Wynn, Glynn, Westbury
Strahan, Andrew, Catherlogh
Vaughan, hon. John, Cardigan
Wynn, Hen. W. W., Midhurst
Strutt, Joseph Holden, Malden
borough
Wynn, sir Watkin William,
Stuart, lord William, Cardiff
Vaughan, sir R. W., Merioneth
bart.; Denbighshire
Stuart-Wortley, J. A., Bossiney
Vereker, Chas., Limerick city
Yarmouth, earl of, Lisburne
Sturges-Bourne, Wm., Christ
Vernon, G. G. V., Litchfield
Yorke, right honourable Charles,
church
Villiers, right honourable J. C.,
Cambridge county
Sumner, G. H., Surrey
Queenborough
Yorke, sir J. S., St. Germans
Sutton, C. M., Scarborough
Vyse, Richard, Beverley
During the First Session of the Third Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and of the Kingdom of Great Britain the Twentieth, appointed to meet at Westminster, the Twenty-eight Day of August, and from thence continued, by several Prorogations, to the Fifteenth Day of December, in the Forty-seventh Year of the Reign of His Majesty King GEORGE the Third, Annoque Domini 1806.
1
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 5,1807.
[MINUTES.]
A considerable crowd assembled this evening, in the avenues leading to the gallery, in expectation of hearing the discussion and further examination of witnesses on the Westminster election petition; but owing to a ballot and a call of the house taking place, the doors Were not opened till half past six. On the admission of strangers into the gallery, we found the house engaged in a conversation relative to some irregularities that had been committed, or accident occasioned by persons forcibly entering through the body of the house, by which some members were likely to be injured. Mr. Yorke declared that in case of any repetition of suck a proceeding, he should think it his duty to enforce the standing order for the exclusion of strangers. Mr. Fellowes complained in strong terms of the crowd in the lobby, through which he had passed with much difficulty, and at the risk of having his arm broken. Mr. Barham observed, that he had seen a number of strangers force their way in spite of the resistance made by the officers of the house. The Speaker declared it to be the duty of the serjeant when he found that the avenues to the house were crowded with strangers, to provide proper persons to clear them, and to maintain order.—Mr. White appeared at the bar, with the reduced list of the committee, ballotted to take into consideration the petition complaining of an undue return for the borough of Guildford. The following are the names .of the said committee: sir J. Callander, H. Everett, esq., H. Brownlow, esq., R. Dawson, esq., H. Peirse esq.,
2
[ROMAN CATHOLIC'S ARMY AND NAVY SERVICE BILL.] Lord Howick rose
in pursuance of the notice he had given some time ago, but which had been suspended in consequence of an alteration which it had been deemed advisable to make in the arrangement of the measure, to move for leave to bring in a bill for securing to all his majesty's liege subjects the privilege of serving in the army or navy, upon their taking an oath prescribed by act of parliament; and for leaving to them, as far as convenience would admit, the free exercise of their respective religions. He should have hoped that such a proposition was not likely to meet with much opposition. He should have imagined that to state it to be a desirable object for all goverments to unite every description of persons living under them in their own defence, was to state .a position
3
4
5
6
7
8
Mr. Perceval
although he would not at present enter into any debate on the proposed bill, yet, as the principle of it was one which he felt it his bounden duty to oppose, he thought it right, even in the first instance, to apprise the noble lord of the nature of his objections, and to call the serious attention of the house, and of the public, to one of the most important and most dangerous measures that had ever been submitted to the judgment of the legislature. It was not so much to the individual measure which he objected, but to the system of which it formed a part, which was growing day after day, and threatening to expand into the most alarming magnitude. If it was desirable to preserve any thing of our ancient and venerable establishments it could only be effected by making a stand against every fresh attempt at innovation. To what did the proposed measure tend? With any degree of consistency its supporters could not stop short of abolishing all the tests which the wisdom of our ancestors had thought it necessary to interpose in defence of our religious establishment. The proposed measure was a partial repeal of the test act, founded on arguments which went to the repeal of that act. It was his firm conviction, that if the legislature wished to preserve Ireland to this country, if they wished to keep the two islands united, they would maintain the protestant interest in Ireland, under which toleration was permitted, and not run the risk of sacrificing that interest to another, which, when in power, had not permitted toleration, and which, if it regained power, might revert to its former practice, as it declared that its principles were Unchangeable. It was the more necessary to pause on this subject, as it had been thought wise and liberal to provide the means of support for a priesthood to instruct three millions of people in the catholic religion, and thus perpetually to combat the progress of protestantism. From the arguments that were advanced at the present day, a man might almost be led to suppose that one religion was considered as good as the other, and that the reformation was deemed only a convenient and political measure. He was far from ascribing indifference on this point to the noble lord, who, he was sure, gave the
9
10
11
12
Lord Temple
said, that he considered it a misfortune to have heard the speech that had been delivered by the hon. and learned gent. who had just sat down: he could not help saying, that it appeared to him to savour much of opinions long since obsolete, and to breathe a kind of spirit fitter for the darker ages, than for the liberal and enlightened times in which we at present lived. Was it necessary at this time of day to go into formal proof of the impolicy, the madness of intolerance? Was it necessary now to prove, that it ever defeated its own end, and contributed to establish what it had conspired to overthrow? He hoped that it was not, and yet the speech of the hon. and learned gent. Would lead the house to suppose, that that gentleman himself entertained doubts of a truth, he might say, universally assented to, and confirmed by the successive experience of ages. He would ask the hon. and learned gent. if it were wise, just or politic, to exclude the brave fellows who made up a considerable portion of our navy and army, from the advantages and the glory of the service, when they shared in all its dangers? It was not usual in so early a stage of a bill to go into all its merits, and he should not now do so; he could not however abstain from entering his solemn protest against the revival of all those intolerant bigotries, which had in all times been productive of the most mischievous effects. The hon. and learned gent. had insinuated gloomy predictions in case of the enemy affecting a landing in Ireland. Upon what were these .apprehensions founded, but the evils which the proposed bill purposed to
13
Mr Yorke
approved of the principle of the bill proposed, as applied to the roman catholics of England; but it was a distinct question how far it should apply to Ireland. He did not think it fair that the roman catholics in Ireland should have any advantages over those in any other parts of the empire. His hon. and learned friend's speech did not appear to him to have deserved the severe animadversion to which it had been subjected by the noble lord who had spoken last. The noble lord had objected to that speech as more worthy of the darker ages. No one who knew the great talents and enlightened mind of ,his hon. and learned friend could suppose that any speech of his could deserve such a description. The sentiments his hon. and learned friend had uttered, were those of 1688, and he wished to know if the noble lord thought the times that placed the house of Hanover on the throne of these realms were the darker ages. He agreed entirely with his hon. and learned friend as to the necessity of putting at length some limits to those daily innovations on the church of England establishment. He did not wish to revive unpleasant remembrances, but, at the same time, as it was impossible to forget the spirit of insurrection which prevailed amongst the Irish catholics in the year 1798, so it must not be wondered at, if feelings of considerable jealousy were excited on the present occa-
14
Mr. Montague
declared, that he considered whatever related to the protestant religion, as distinguished from the roman catholic, to be of serious importance to this country, and that the preservation of the protestant establishment was essentially requisite to maintain the peace both of this country and Ireland. Upon the subject of religion, the house had two Principles to look to; the first was that of toleration, without which nothing could go on well in a country; and next to this was the security of the establishment. He was afraid, from the arguments which had been adduced by the noble lord who had introduced this measure, that similar innovations would be pressed upon the house, and would at last proceed so far as to render it impossible for parliament, to maintain the tests which experience had proved to be so useful. The same sort of arguments would go to admit all dissenters into all offices and places of public appointment, even those which a large majority of that house, formerly, and which the nation at large had considered as dangerous to the religious establishment of the country. The constitution of this country and a church establishment were so interwoven with each
15
16
Mr. Fremantle
declared, that in his view of the subject, the measure now proposed did not bear upon the constitution of the country. There was no clause in this bill that went to provide for the establishment of the catholic clergy, either in the army or navy. It did not militate either against the bill of rights or the act of settlement, and he should feel sorry if such an impression as this were made upon the public mind.
Mr.T. W. Plummer
said, this measure appeared to him to be one which called for the serious attention of the house. The country had been deprived for a long time of the services of a large body of people, and now that a fair opportunity offered for granting the present boon, he trusted the time was come, when no honest catholic would be deprived of the opportunity of serving his country.
Mr. Corry
lamented, that upon the introduction of this measure, an alarm should have been raised, as if it would draw the protestant establishments of England and Ireland into danger. He hoped gentlemen would come to the consideration of this question without prejudice. It was a question of importance, and its tendency was to prevent the natives of Ireland from being banished from the ranks of military fame and glory at home, and being drawn into the service of foreign countries. This measure went to secure their services at home, and ought therefore to be examined upon its own merits. The principles of the revolution ought always to beheld in the greatest veneration; but when the house looked to the
17
Mr. I. H. Browne
thought certainly that gentlemen should not be too hasty to take an alarm, till they saw the bill. But with regard to the catholic religion, he considered its spirit to be as hostile to the liberties of this country, as any arbitrary power could be. He trusted that there was no dread of any foreign conqueror; but should a succesful and formidable usurper, who has cemented tyranny wherever he has gone, penetrate to Ireland, and avail himself of the Pope's bull, for the re-establishment of the catholic religion in that country, he could not think, that additional indulgences would ensure the loyalty of that body. He was far from thinking that concession after concession would conciliate the affections, or ensure the obedience of the Irish catholics. He foresaw considerable danger from these concessions, as they tended to prepossess the minds of the catholics with expectations of still farther concessions. He was averse to innovations, unless an existing evil could be proved, which could not be remedied but by law; but in the present instance, he was not aware that any such practical inconvenience existed. Unless the house was prepared to go the length of saying, that every office in the united kingdom was to be open to persons of all religions, he could see no good argument for advancing catholics to the highest appointments in the army. He should, however, have no objection to put all the roman catholics in the united kingdom upon the same footing as the Irish
18
Lord Howick
in reply, said, he had hoped that his motion for introducing the bill would have passed without any discussion. He wished this question to be treated on its own merits. He did not consider it as standing upon the ground, of toleration; but that it rested on the footing, that, in consequence of what had formerly passed in the Irish parliament, it was necessary ,to make the laws in the two countries consistent with themselves, and not to suffer the catholics to be in that anomalous situation in which no people were ever placed before. He saw no reason for that alarm which some hon. gentlemen had endeavoured to create; for, as to this measure, it could,be attended no danger to the religion or establishment of the country. He could not concur opinion with the hon. and learned gent, that if a person in the army was called out in obedience to the order of his superior, and at the, peril of his that therefore he could not incur any penalty under possible circumstances;. he could not subscribe to the hon. and learned gent's exposition of the law, particularly on the subject of compulsory service, and more especially when he recollected the opinion which that hon. and learned gent. had formerly given on the subject of the volunteers. The Irish act of Parliament could only regulate the army of Ireland; and if an Irish regiment removed to England, it was then upon the English establishment, to which the acts of the Irish parliament could not extend, and consequently its officers were subject to all the penalties which a British legislature had enacted. But, from the moment of the union taking place between the two countries, and when there was no longer an Irish army, but the army of the United Kingdom,
19
de fucto
20
[COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY —PRUSSIAN SUBSIDY.]—Mr. Hobhouse
brought up the Report of the Committee of supply. On the resolution for granting 80,000l, to make good a like sum granted to the King of Prussia,
Mr. Bankes
regarding this grant as the first instalment a subsidy to Prussia, and regarding subsidies, though they might be wise in some circumstances, as very generally unwise, felt, himself bound,to state his sentiment at some length. He would recal the attention of the house to the subsidies granted since the commencement of the late war, every one of which it was thought hard to refuse at the time, but everyone of which had altogether failed of
21
Lord H.Petty
sated, that this advance
22
Mr. Bankes
under the explanation that had been given, had no objection to make good the advance that had been made by lord Hutchinson. He was pleased with the assurance given by the noble lord, that in future treaties of subsidy past experience would be made the guide, and that vast sums would not be advanced without any certain benefit.
Lord Howick
said, that lord Hutchinson had a discretionary power to make advances in case of any pressing emergency, and he was sure every person would agree that such a discretion could not be placed in better hands. There was no treaty of subsidy But he would not have the house go away with the idea that government was precluded from granting a subsidy, if circumstances should render it desirable. He agreed that many of the former subsidies were must unwise in principle, and most unproductive in even. But every case depended upon its own circumstances. A principle of caution ought always to be applied, to prevent the advances from being made unnecessarily, or incautiously, so as to hazard a risk, that no benefit would be derived. He dissapproved of all subsidies which would hold out English money to induce foreign powers to enter into war without any objects of their own. But when they were engaged, or ready to engage, for common interests, he thought it would be very wrong not to hold ourselves at liberty to second and support them. He allowed that past experience ought to be
23
[MR. PAULL'S PETITION RESPECTING THE WESTMINSTER ELECTION.]. Lord Folkestone
moved the order of the day for taking into further consideration the Petition of James Paull, Esq., complaining of undue tampering with the witnesses summoned to give evidence before the committee, about to be appointed to try the merits of the late Election for Westminster. [See in vol. S, the proceedings of the 26th of February and the 2d of March.]
Mr. Sheridan
said, that by the forms of the house, a witness could not stay in the house during the examination of the witnesses. He had summoned Mr. Paull as a witness, but he begged to state that he had no objection to his remaining at the bar the whole time of the proccedings—The counsel for the petitioner were then called in, and
Mr. Plumer
addressed the house as follows:—"Mr. Speaker; I now proceed to discharge the duty which, under the indulgence of the house, I have been permitted to reserve for this day, in stating the petition of Mr. Paull and the evidence in support of it, and, sir, with every grateful acknowledgments to the house for the indulgence I have experienced, I must, at the same time, state to the house the inability I am under to profit entirely by it. The very voluminous body of evidence and the inability of access to it till a very late period, have prevented my adverting to many of the circumstances which have been stated. I shall, therefore, content myself with addressing only general observations, except on particular parts of the testimony which we are able to collect as most important on the subject: and, in discharging this duty, I shall, on every consideration, most rigidly abstain from every topic which does not directly belong to the duty imposed upon me. I shall endeavour to discharge that duty,as briefly as I am able, from every consideration of duty and of respect to the house, as well as other considerations with which it is, unnecessary for me to trouble you.—Sir, I shall in the first place, state what are the allegations contained in the petition, and then briefly remind you of the evidence you have heard in support of it; and, on this subject, I am persuaded, whatever judgment the house may finally think proper to pronounce with respect to this petition, I hope I am not too sanguine in expecting, that whatever difference of opinion
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
in verbis
37
Mr. Sheridan
protested, that he was never more surprised at any thing than at the speech which he had just heard from the learned counsel. He had heard rumours that he intended to have thrown up his brief. But, if he was surprised, he was not alarmed. The learned counsel had said that he (Mr. S.) had an advantage over the petitioner. He denied this, as he had not availed himself of the assistance of counsel. If he had been capable of stating, as proved matter, that which had been only asserted, and that too by witnesses who had been nearly commited by the house for scandalous prevarication—if he had stated every thing in the evidence that made for him, and none that made against him, and had the stupidity to think that the house would believe him, then he might be said to have the advantage. He expressed his high respect for the profession, but thought there were limits within which counsel ought to confine themselves; and certainly it would have been much more proper if the counsel, instead of pressing the matter as he did, had stood at the bar in shame and confusion at his being engaged in such a cause. He perfectly admitted the great respectability of the solicitors; Messrs Williams and Brooks, and had heard that Mr. Williams had even thrown up the cause. He wished that Mr. Powell might stand as clear. He wished, that Mr. Paull and Mr. Powell might have been only dupes in the business. He should be glad if it should appear so. But when he examined his witnesses, there would appear, he believed, such a system of baseness, corruption, and subornation of perjury as had never before been heard of. He wished the counsel for the petitioner to hear the evidence. The learned counsel, though he remarked on the part the evidence where Drake had stated, that he had been employed by him (Mr. S ) to get the letter from Harris, had forgot to mention that the witness had afterwards stated, that he had offered £30 of his own money to get the letter-from Mr, Paull. His own money! He wished it
38
Mr. Perceval
observed, that the right hon. gent. had certainly taken the advantage over the counsel when he had spoken, of him in the manner he had done. There might have been rumours of his intention to throw up his brief; but when so much was at stake with respect to the client who employed him, it was not for the counsel to prejudge the case, and if he had heard ,that he had thrown up his brief, he certainly would not have believed it. It was impossible to misunderstand the counsel when he said that these charges were proved, for he had distinctly qualified it by referring this to the credit due to the,witnesses. There,was, therefore, no more grounds for his imputations against the counsel, than for his assertion that there was a gross falsehood in the petition. It stated, that the consideration of the election petition glad been postponed from the 24th of Feb to the 14th of April. This was true, and no intention appeared of denying that it had been in the first instance fixed for the 13th of January.
Mr. Sheridan
said, that he had a great respect for the counsel; but still though that he ought to have been somewhat more liberal. If the allegation it was at least a
39
Mr. Frederick Homan examined by the House
40
41
Cross-examined by Mr. Warren, on behalf of the Petitioner.
42
43
44
Examined by the House.
45
46
Mr. Charles Wm. Ward examined by the House.
"Were you present at a conversation in Somerset Place with Mr. Weatherhead and Mr. Drake, when Mr. S. came in, about 7 o' clock? I was.—Where did Drake state himself to have been, and what did he state as to the necessity of his returning again to the country? 'That he had been in Hampshire, hunting in the company of Mr. Cobbett; that he had a cottage, which he had lately purchased, in Hampshire ; that he had just come to town.—Did Mr. S. ever whisper with Mr. Drake, or have any conversation in a way which could not be heard by any person in the room? It was impossible without my having heard it.—Did Mr. S. offer any money, or any thing whatever, to Mr. Drake? There was nothing offered in my presence.—When Mr. Drake stated that he was about to leave town the next morning, what did Mr. S. say? That he must not leave town, that he must be in the way.—In what character was Mr. Weatherhead introduced? In the character of a clergyman; and, on my observing that he must be chaplain of the ship, and Mr. Drake hesitating, Mr. S. asked what ship he was chaplain of; Mr. Drake said, it was his brother was a clergyman; that he was frequently making that mistake.—What did Mr. S. declare was his intention and motive for desiring them to call the next morning? I understood it was, that they should be in the way.—Did you ever hear Drake say, that he had received considerable sums of money by a legacy, or by prize-money? By a legacy.—Did you ever hear him state, that he had got the command of a brig, or sloop, and must go down to take the command? That he had got the command of the Thisbe brig; this was on the 10th; and that he must go on the following morning, which was the 11 th."
Cross-examined by Mr. Clifford, ore behalf of the Petitioner.
"How long have you been acquainted, with lieut. Drake? I saw him for the first time upon the 10th of Feb.—Where?. At Mr. Homan's in Frith street.—At what time of the day? About 8 or 9 in the evening.—Did you go away in company with him? I did.—Who else were of the party that went away in company with him? Mr. Johnston and Mr, Edwards.—Where did you go to? To Mr. Edwards's house in South-street.—Whom did you meet at Mr. Edwards's? I did not go into the house.—Where did you go, afterwards that evening? To the next door, Mr. Thomas Sheridan's.—Did you
47
48
Examined by the House.
"Did the gentlemen who were present at Mr. Homan's on the evening of the 10th, leave Mr. Homan's for South-street together? We did, in the same coach.—Did you go away together in consequence of any proposition or arrangement that took place on tho evening of the 10th? Mr. Drake expressed great anxiety to see Mr. S. that evening, the only evening he had; Mr. Edwards got a coach, and I of course went with that.—Do you know that Mr. S. was brought from sir Gilbert Heathcote's to South-street? I mentioned what I knew to Mr. T. S. and he wrote a note to his father Mr. S.—What conversation passed between Drake and Mr. S. when Mr. S. came to Somerset-place? It was entirely confined to Mr. Drake's new purchase, and his hunting with Mr. Cobbett.
Aaron Graham, Esq. examined by the House.
"Do you recollect receiving a letter from Mr. Sheridan, desiring you to do Mr. S. the
49
50
Emanuel Harris examined by the House.
How came you first to see Mr. Sheridan, or to go to Somerset-place? I was served with a Speaker's warrant from the house of commons by Mr. Boswell of Gosport; he applied to me several times for the letter I received from Mr. Drake.—Was any money or temptation held out to you by Mr. Boswell, or any other person, to give up that letter? When Mr. Boswell served me with the warrant, a day or two after he met me, and says, Mr. Harris, do you want any money? I said, no, Mr. Boswell. There was a gentleman by the name of Mr. Joseph, who keeps a shop at Gosport; he said, Harris, do you hear what Mr. Boswell said? I said, I do, sir; he then said, will you go up tonight with me in a post-chaise? I said, no, sir; I am going up, but I shall go up in the stage: I did not go up that night, but a night or two after. When I arrived in town on the 5th of Feb. I was not scarce half an hour in my house when Mr. Boswell and Mr. Jukes, the banker from Gosport, arrived at my house; they came and applied to me for the letter I had from Mr. Drake, signed R. B. Sheridan, Treasurer of the. Navy. I immediately went away; I told them to wait a little, I would let them know in a minute whether I would let them have it or not I made my way out of the house, and went over to Mr. Sheridan's house; I live in Holy well-street. When I went into Mr. Sheridan's, I saw Mr. Burgess, he was there, and I told him the case, that there were two gentlemen at my house; I have a letter so and so, which I have by me; there are two gentlemen want it: I do not know whether I do right to deliver that letter out of my hands, as I have a Speaker's warrant which I shall obey. I went away. Mr. Burgess told Mr. Jukes and Mr. Boswell that he would send them to Bow-street, if they came to inquire for the letter, Which they had no right to do; however they went away that day. At that time Mr. Burgess said, Mr. Harris, I shall come to you presently again; I said very well, sir. He came to me about an hour after; I said, how do you do, Mr. Burgess? he said, how, do you do Mr. Harris ? He said, I shall be very happy to see you this evening, about 5 o'clock; I said, I will attend you; I shall be at home. He came and asked, will you have the goodness to walk over to Mr. Sheridan's? I did, and took the letter with me, and showed it to Mr. Sheridan. After a few words I went home, and they applied for the letter again, and I told Mr. Burgess of it,
51
52
Cross-examined by Mr. Clifford, on behalf of the Petitioner.
Look at that signature (R. B. Sheridan); it appeals to be blotted, does, not it? Yes.—Were you present when that blotting took place? I do not know.—When first that letter was delivered to you, was there any blotting on the name of R. B. Sheridan? I cannot say whether there was or not.—Was there any blotting upon the name there, after you came to town? That I cannot answer. When I was served with a warrant I took and locked it in a trunk of mine in the same piece of paper it is in now, and I took it and kept it at home, and never had it out of doors since.—Do you mean to say you cannot tell whether that blot on the name of R. B. Sheridan took place before or after you
53
54
Examined by the House.
Did you vote at the election for Westminster? Yes.—For whom? For Mr. S.—Did you vote before you received that letter? believe it was 9 or 10 days afterwards.—Did you apply to Drake in the first instance to
55
Mrs. Butler examined by the House.
Have you sufficient means of knowing the character of Mr. Weatherhead? Yes, I have. His brother, whenever he came to town, logged at my house; and whenever he came he asked for his brother, and he has often sent for him; he is a poor unfortunate person; he was born in the year 1760; here is his age.—What is your opinion of Mr. Weatherhead, and would you believe his testimony on oath? I could not believe his .testimony at all; he is a man of very bad character; he used to go out and be torn all to pieces, and his brother was quite ashamed of him.—Is he of that reputation you would not believe him upon his oath? I would not believe him for a farthing, upon his oath.—With what company has he associated? The last time he was in my house, he was in company with Robertson, who was hung lately; that was a few clays before Robertson was taken up; I never saw him till this evening and then he went away the moment he saw me.—Was he acquainted with a person of the name of Bazeley? Yes, he lived with the same woman; Bazeley lived with a girl of the name of Lucy Wallis.—Robertson was hung? Yes, and Bazeley too.
Cross-examined by Mr. Warren on behalf the Petitioner.
What is this house of your's? My house is the Queen's Head.—What do you deal
56
Mr. Paull
was examined respecting some letters said to have passed between him and B. Hart. He acknowledged the hand-writing, and was proceeding to offer some observations upon the question to the house, when he was reminded by the Speaker of the capacity in which he then stood at the bar of the house.
Mr. B Hart
was next examined. He had been employed by Mr. Paull during the election; he did not, however, consider himself as Mr. Paull's agent. Mr. Paull called at his house and left his card: he called a second time, and requested him to come to his house, Charles-street, St. James's-square, which he did, when Mr. Paull entreated him to exert his influence to procure him votes. About a week after the election he had some conversation with Mr. Paull and Mr. Powell respecting some suspicions that had gone abroad about bad votes said to have been given to Mr. Sheridan, and they recommended to him to endeavour to procure information respecting that matter; he however soon after fell ill, in which state he continued some weeks, and had not seen Mr. Paull since.
Mr. Sheridan
was proceeding to ask the witness several more questions respecting his employment during the election, whether he did accompany Mr. Paull in his carriage to and from the hustings, &c. &c., when
Lord Howick
observed, that his hon. friend, according to his own principle laid down on a former occasion, thought it best not to touch upon the general conduct of the election, but merely upon the allegations contained in the petition.
Mr. Sheridan
said, that such was the object he had in view; but he thought it necessary, at the same time, to ascertain the characters of the persons who were made the instruments to attempt to prove these allegations, and carry on one of the foulest conspiracies that the malignity of man had ever conceived.—The examination and testimony of the last witness was then ordered to be expunged from the minutes taken at he bar, on the ground that it entered too
57
Mr. Sheridan
observed, that, if the house should deem it necessary to adapt any further proceedings relative to what was disclosed at their bar, there were several other witnesses in readiness, whom, perhaps, it might be thought necessary to call in, as they might possibly corroborate many of the particulars which had fallen from the other witnesses, or fill up some trifling chasms in the evidence; for his own part, however, he did not mean to trouble the house with any farther evidence, but was perfectly satisfied to let his case rest where it was. The papers which had been moved for that night, by a noble lord (Howick), world be sufficient to shew that there was not a word of truth in what had been said by Drake and another, who was thought to be a principal witness on the part of the petitioner.
Lord Howick
declared his firm conviction, that a foul and scandalous conspiracy had been entered into against the sitting member; and in order that the house might have an opportunity of judging more precisely as to the quality of the .evidence which had been adduced at their bar, he moved that the evidence be printed, which was ordered accordingly.
Mr. Whitbread
observed, that it might be neceesary to take some measure to secure the future attendance of the witnesses at the bar, in case the house should think fit to take any further steps relative to the nature of the evidence which they had heard,—The house then ordered, that the further proceeding on the Westminster petition and evidence should be resumed on Friday the 15th instant, and that the witnesses should attend on that day.
Mr. Sheridan
thought it but justice to Mr. Cobbett to state, before the rising of the house, that notwithstanding What Drake had asserted, he was fully satisfied that he was entirely unconnected with the scandalous proceedings which had been taken against him.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, March 6.
[MINUTES.] Mr. Hobhouse
chairman of the committee appointed to try the merits of the Wick election, reported, that the sitting member, Mr. Mackenzie, was duly elected, and that the petition of Sir John Sinclair against him was not frivolous nor vexatious.
[CONDUCT OF MR. CAWTHORNE.] Colonel Wilder
seeing an hon. general in his
58
General Porter
said, that no man was a more anxious than he that this matter should be brought to a speedy decision, which must be equally desirable to the house and the gentleman who was the object of the motion. But the house having thought fit to appoint a committee to inquire into precedents relating to expulsion, he could not possibly proceed till that committee should have made its report, That report being now before the house, it was his intention this day, if the chairman of tho committee alluded to had been present, to fix a day as early as consistent with the convenience of that hon. gent., and that of the house. He would now merely state, that be intended on Monday to fix as early a day as possible, consistent with these objects.
[CALL OF THE HOUSE.]
The names of The defaulters at the ballot for the Guilford election committee, on Thursday, were called over, and those who had no excuse to offer, were ordered to attend in their places on Tuesday, and in the event of there being absent without excuse on that day, to be taken into the custody of the serjeant at arms.
Mr. Perceval
took occasion here to say, that he did not look upon what was stated from any particular side of the house on cases of this kind to be the law. He should take the liberty of exercising his own judgment on every individual ease till the house should have pronounced upon it. On the occasion on he had been a defaulter, he had been in attendance at the bar of the house of lords, in the discharge of his professional duty. It was not for him to say whether that would be, in the sense of the house, an excuse; but he wished to know from the sense of the house whether his absence was criminal in such cases. He was unwilling to depend on what might be the sense of one side of the house or of any individual.
The Speaker
stated, that it was the law of the house, that defaulters should be taken into custody. The order now made was but a notice that this law would be enforced.
59
Lord H. Petty
said, that this proceeding of taking defaulters into custody was, as had been stated from the chair, the law of the house. But it was open to the house to exercise its judgment on every individual case, and either to enforce the law, or dispense with its enforcement, upon sufficient excuse, or at its pleasure. But it was to be understood that, generally, it would be enforced, and that was the reason for making it a particular order on every particular occasion.
[SLAVE TRADE ABOLITION BILL]
The house, on the motion of lord Howick, resolved itself into a committee on the Slave Trade Abolition bill.
Sir Charles Pole
opposed the measure, not, he observed, with a view to the consideration of any individual interests, but as an object of the utmost national importance. About the year 1780, there were 15,000 persons destroyed by a hurricane in Jamaica; in case of such an event taking place again, it would be found impossible to uphold the state of property in the islands, without importation. On the other hand, if the trade was not permitted by parliament to be continued, it would be found almost impossible to prevent smuggling; or even if we did compleatly abandon the trade, it would be immediately taken up by the enemy, who would increase and strengthen his navy by those means, and we might soon expect to see the downfall of the British empire. At least he thought it might be expedient to give the planters time to add to their number of female slaves, as a probable means of laying the foundation for a better supply in future. He therefore moved, that instead of May, 1807, the words May, 1812, should be inserted, as the time for the commencement of the operation of the bill.
Mr. Ward
contended that our colonies would neither be injured nor ruined by the operation of the immediate abolition, but that on the contrary they would be benefited thereby. The disproportion between births and deaths had been for several Years declining in Jamaica. And the beneficial operation of this measure would leave the effect of reducing that disproportion still more. Besides, the population would be kept up by the kind treatment, which it would then be the interest of the planters to extend to their negroes. He should prefer the rejection of the whole measure to voting for the extension of its commencement for five years, which would be only a com-
60
Sir Philip Francis
argued in favour of the bill. He maintained, that the abolition, so far from being injurous to the navy of this country, would be advantageous to our maritime strength, by preserving our seamen from the mortality which took place in the prosecution of that trade. If it were to be only a question respecting the navy of this country and the navy of France, he should not have any objection that the whole of the French navy should be employed in that trade; and he was convinced that our navy would maintain its superiority, while that of the enemy would be reduced still lower than it was at present. Nothing tended so much to the calamities that had ruined St. Domingo, as the unlimited power that individuals had of increasing the disproportion between the black and the white population. This bill would extinguish that power, and, therefore, secure the tranquillity of the British colonies.
Mr. Fuller
would be extremely glad to hear by what regulations the hon. member's father (Mr. Ward) kept up the population on his estate in Jamaica, and there could not be the smallest doubt of all the other planters being extremely obliged to him, and most cheerfully following his example; He had heard something of its local situation, preventing the negroes from mixing with those on the estates adjoining; their habits were different, and that might in some measure account for the difference in the maintenance of the population on that particular estate. He cautioned gentlemen, however, against being led away by false notions of popularity and humanity. Those who were planter themselves might easily raise a clamour against the cruelty of the planters, &c., but he would have gentlemen to recollect that the West Indies had been the support of the country for many years, both as to seamen and revenue. We might as well say, Oh, we will not have our chimney swept, because it is a little troublesome to the boy, as that we should give up the benefit of the West Indies on account of the supposed hardships of the negro.
General Vyse
vindicated the character of the planters for humanity; but supported the bill most strenuously, on the ground that there was a most shameful abuse of the authority delegated by them.
Sir T. Turton
observed. that if the mea-
61
Mr. H. Addington
supported the amendment; but at the same time recommended that a parliamentary commission should be sent out to every island in the West Indies, and that parliament might afterwards lay very high duties on the importation of slaves into every island where the traffic was found to be still carried on.
Mr. Whitbread
thought it would be a most tedious and impotent measure to wait until we had the report of as many of the commissioners as might chance to reach home with the report, and then leave the measure in a great degree to the discretion of the governors of the different islands. But there was one point which he thought to be particularly worthy of notice; the council for the planters had acknowledged at the bar of the house of lords, that it was intended to have several new pieces of land cultivated, for which a fresh supply of slaves was wanted; and there was another point to which he thought it necessary to advert; did the gallant admiral opposite suppose that we, as christians, could hope, when visited by the wrath of Heaven, as he had stated, with a hurricane, could we then hope for a blessing from the Almighty by setting off to Africa to rob and murder in order to recruit our stock?
Mr. Rose
entered into a detail of the various proceedings of parliament, and the opinion of the most eminent public men for a century past as to this trade. He concluded by observing, that his late right hon. friend (Mr Pitt) was in his heart a most sincere abolitionist, as well as himself, though there was some difference of opinion between them as to the best means of carrying that principle into execution.
Lord H. Petty
opposed any further delay; he contended that the authorities cited by the right hon. gent. were not conclusive; on speculative truths the most clear and in-Controvertible, there had been in all ages men of probity and wisdom who had their own peculiar and exclusive sentiments. In the parliaments of France how long was it a subject of discussion, whether torture should be sanctioned or not? And yet could there
62
Mr. Canning
took a view of the subject in three different relations, with respect to Africa, the slave merchants, and the slaves themselves; the arguments advanced by the hon. baronet (sir C. Pole) appeared to him to have been completely overturned by the statement of facts advanced by the gallant general in support of them; he was decidedly for the most speedy abolition of so disgraceful a traffic.
Mr. Bathurst
thought the immediate abolition of the trade imposible.
Mr. Barham
was of a contrary opinion, and thought that the measure, to be effectual, must be speedy.
Mr. Perceval
warmly contended for the necessity of immediate abolition.—The question being loudly called for, the committee divided.
For the immediate abolition
175
Against it
17
Majority
158
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, March 9.
[SCOTCH JUDICATURE BILL.] The Lord Chancellor
stated that he had received a letter from the lord president of the Court of Session in Scotland, addressed to him as lord high chancellor, purporting to be a Memorial from the College of Justice, which was signed by the lord president and ten other judges, with a note of dissent from the four remaining judges. It adverted to the bill before the house for the better regulation of the courts of justice in Scotland, and stated, that it was of great importance that they should be permitted to lay before the house certain considerations relative to that subject. As he could not, from the form of the memorial, move that it should be now laid upon the table, he wished to receive their lordship's instruction as to the course of proceeding which he should adopt. He therefore moved that the lords should be summoned for the next day.—Ordered.
63
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday March 9.
[MUTINY BILL.]
The house, on the motion of the Secretary at War, having gone into a committee on the Mutiny bill,
The Secretary at War
made a few observations on the momentous object of the bill, which went to preserve the civil power from all possibility of military encroachment; he then read some of the clauses which he wished to have made part of the bill. Officers or soldiers charged with capital offences, to be turned over to the civil magistrate; but no officer to be ipso facto cashiered for not aiding the civil power, until convicted of such charge before a court of justice. Another clause was introduced and agreed to, enacting that a mark shall be fixed on the bodies of deserters who have been twice guilty of desertion. Another clause compelled deserters to serve for life, and made such forfeit additional pay and pension. A further clause required that no person should be sentenced to the loss of life or limb, or to transportation, by a general court martial, consisting of less than thirteen officers. The clause relative to the enlisting money, as also that providing compensation for masters whose servants or labourers may have enlisted before the time contracted for had expired, gave rise to a short conversation between Mr. R. Dundas, sir T. Turton, colonel Barry, Mr. Rose and Mr. Secretary Windham, when, after a slight amendment of the latter, both were agreed to. The remaining clauses, including one declaring all negroes in his majesty's service free to all intents and purposes, were then severally read and agreed to, and, on the house resuming, the report was ordered to be received the next day.
[SLAVE TRADE ABOLITION BILL.] Mr. Hobhouse
brought up the report of the Slave Trade Abolition bill. On the motion that the amendments be read a second time,
Lord Howick rose
and said, that before the amendments were read, he was anxious to advert to what had passed on a former occasion, and propose, what he flattered himself would be sufficient to obviate certain objections; in doing this, however, he begged to be understood as not in the slightest degree swerving from the opinions he had advanced, and still entertained, of the principles of the bill itself. He wished to give gentlemen, who had started their objections, every possible accommodation;
64
Mr. Hibbert
said he should reserve what he had to say for a future stage of the bill.
General Vyse
contended that the terms used in the first preamble, were but characterestic of so infamous a trade, and represented the miseries of the wretched victims in a three fold point of view, the circumstances of their capture and sale in Africa, those of their passage to the colonies, and the manner of their reception on their arrival there.
Mr. Rose
thought, that the wording of the preamble as it originally stood, would have been productive of dangerous consequences among the slaves.
Mr. Wilberforce
could not see it in so alarming a point of view, but had no objection to the amendment.
Mr. Fuller
felt himself much obliged to the noble lord for the Willingness he had evinced towards general accommodation on this subject; he could not however help adverting to the unfair and unhandsome construction that had been put upon his own conduct in this business; he did not much like to see upon a former night an hon. member going about the house asking questions about his estate in the colonies, the name of it, and other circumstances, as if it were to detect him (Mr. Fuller) in any assertion that might not
65
Mr. Barham
approved of the amendment in the preamble proposed by the noble lord (Howick) on principles of policy. The impressing upon the minds of the negroes that it was by a violation of the laws of justice and humanity that they came there, would be only filling their minds with unavailing regret. He acknowledged that the circulation of the papers respecting the abolition in the West Indies, was rather a singular sort of proceeding. But, at the same time, the negroes must have learnt from these that the sentiments concerning the inhumanity, injustice, &c. of the measure were only those of the minority in this country. He recommended conciliatory measures, and observed, that whatever bad effects might result from the mode of proceeding in this business, he had nothing to do with them. He disapproved of the trade itself, but had objections to the manner of abolishing it.
Mr. Dickenson
observed, that the opinions which he formerly maintained on this subject were much weakened; still, however, doubted the policy of the measure, but at the same time could not help paying his tribute of approbation to the moderation of the noble lord.
General Gascoyne
also approved of the amendment; but still contended that the measure would in the first instance occasion a separation of interests and opinions between this country and the colonies, and ultimately occasion an entire separation, unless the
66
Lord Howick
proposed a clause to prevent the late regulations for limited service extending to the negroes. The negroes, therefore, are still to be inlisted in the first instance, his Majesty having the power to make such regulations respecting them as he may hereafter judge proper. The object of this was to prevent any apprehensions of their becoming chargeable to the islands. This clause was received and added to the bill.—The amendment in the preamble, and the amendments in the committee were then agreed to, and the bill was ordered to be read a third time on Wednesday.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, March 10.
[SCOTCH JUDICATURE BILL.]—Lord Grenville rose
to move for certain accounts, previous to the introduction of the subject, for the consideration of which their lordships were then particularly summoned. He had, on a former occasion, when he proposed to the house his intention of bringing in a bill for the regulation of the Courts of Justice in Scotland, adverted to the great inconvenience which the house had already suffered, and which it was likely yet to suffer, in consequence of the great number of appeal causes submitted to its judicial consideration. He should therefore at present trouble their lordships with two motions; first, that an account be presented to the house of the number of Scotch Appeals, from the year 1794 to 1801; and next; an Account of the number of Scotch and Irish Appeals, from 1801 to the present year 1807.—Ordered accordingly.
The Lord Chancellor
having quitted the woolsack, observed, that he was induced to call the attention of their lordships to a communication made to him from the president and senators of the College of Justice in Scotland, for the purpose of being guided by the wisdom and decision of the house, on a subject in which he was unwilling to trust to his own private judgment and opinion. He had received from that body a memorial, adverting to the bill at present before the house, for the better regulation of the Courts of Justice in Scotland; but, as it contained no distinct prayer, nor complained of any specific grievance, he did not feel himself justified by any precedent in the Parliamentary History of the country, to present it to their lordships. He found, from a reference to a marginal note in the
67
Lord Grenville
declared himself particularly satisfied with the motives and reasons which had induced his noble and learned friend to apply to their lordships for advice and instruction in the present case. But, though willing to give every credit for the caution which was observe, he still must assert, that the usages and forms of parliament, the practice and precedents of the house, were conclusive against the receiving of this memorial from the Court of Session. Parliament had uniformly, for the best and most salutary reasons, denied to any person or body, the right or opportunity of giving advice upon subjects submitted to its legislative consideration. This was of itself mandatory on their lordships, not to receive the communication alluded to by his noble and learned friend. But there was a further objection, arising from the uniform custom of the house, not to allow even petitions to be laid upon its table, coming from any alleged body, unless that body were legally and justifiably entitled to approach the legislature in a corporate capacity. He was convinced his noble and learned friend felt upon this subject, as he did; although he was conscious of the strong and powerful inducements which urged him to apply to their lordships. There was considerable attention to be paid to the venerable and learned body from whom this communication was received. This his noble and learned friend
68
Lord Eldon
was of opinion, that although
69
The Earl of Lauderdale
expressed himself as anxious as any other noble lord, to have the opinion of the Court of Session laid before the house: but, at the same time, he wished to be fully understood, that in order to prevent any Farther delay in receiving such opinion, the lords of the Court of Session should petition the house in their individual capacity, for only in that capacity could their petition be received, With respect to one of the precedents referred to, it would be found by the preamble of the Bill on the Forfeited Estates, that the lords of the Court of Session were only heard as petitioners, or, as the bill more appropriately recited, as supplicants. He deprecated the proposal of consulting the lords of Session on the enactment of a legislative measure; such conduct would be inconsistent with the character and forms of parliament; it was a principle which the house never did nor could recognise. By the 10th of George I. parliament deprived the Court of Session of the right of interfering in the appointment of the judges, yet the house did not conceive it necessary to apply for information to the lords of the Court of Session, Indeed, in all cases where the history of parliament afforded an opportunity of inquiry, whether applicable to England or Scotland, he contended, that, however parliament might have deemed it necessary to apply to the judges for their opinions on points of law, it never did commit to their investigation a legislative mea-
70
The Lord Chancellor
said, that he would take upon himself to make the necessary communication to the learned lord from whom he received the memorial, without in any manner committing the house, or compromising its privileges or character.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, March 10.
[MINUTES.]
—The following are the names of the members remaining on the reduced list of the members chosen by ballot to try and determine the merits of the Petition complaining of an undue election for Taunton; T. S. Gooch, esq. sir John Aubrey, G. Baillie, esq. John Pattison, esq. sir T. Mostyn, R. Morris, esq. W H. Fellowes, esq. Cecil Forrester, esq. R. Manners, esq. E. M. Mundy, esq. hon. J. W. Grimston, John T. P. B. Trevanion, esq. R. Holt Leigh, esq. Nominees; sir J. Dashwood King, bt. right hon. N. Bond.
[PETITION OF MR. COCHRANE JOHN-STONE.] Mr. Whitbread
stated, that he held in his hand a Petition from the hon, Andrew Cochrane Johnston, late colonel of the 8th West India Regiment, and governor of the Island of Dominica. Before he opened the subject of it, he thought it proper to explain to the house, that he had not the honour of the petitioner's acquaintance. He never saw him until yesterday, when he had a few minutes conversation with him. The petition, he understood, had been offered to several members who had declined presenting it. In conformity with a principle which he had laid down for himself, he thought it his duty to present it, at the same time he begged to be understood as not being in the smallest degree pledged to the truth of the allegations contained in it.
71
existing
existence
punished
existing
72
punished
73
no difficulty, provided the result of the court martial was favourable to him
74
75
after such proof had been given
since he had communicated to the duke of York the letter in which the aforesaid remark was contained, he had seen occasion to recall that letter, and to substitute another in lieu thereof leaving out the said remark, and that he had taken upon, himself to explain to the king, the reason why this remark
was now omitted
form his opinion upon the whole matter of each case
76
one irresponsible individual.
London, March 2d
The Secretary at War
observed, that as there was no pledge to bring forward any motion on this petition, he would now take the opportunity of saying a few words, because it had been spread abroad that he had pledged himself to bring this matter before the house. He was glad of this opportunity of giving a public contradiction to that charge. Some gentlemen who had been in the late parliament, might recollect the notice which he had given: but, as many of the present parliament might not be acquainted with the proceeding, he would state the case exactly as it stood. He had observed, in the case of Mr. Johnstone, and in many others, what appeared to him to be an abusive practice in military justice. This arose from the nature of the powers of the judge advocate. It seemed to him a strange impropriety that the judge advocate, in these cases, should be the only person consulted when a decision was given by the king, and that there should be no consultation the commander in chief, the person intrusted by his Majesty with the management of the forces, and who ought properly to be responsible. He therefore gave notice of a proposition to put an end to that practice. Subsequent to that notice, a change took place in his Majesty's councils, and this afforded him the means of applying the remedy without having recourse to parliament; and he was happy to state, that having
77
Mr. William Dundas
could not subscribe to the doctrine of the hon gent. (Mr. Whitbread) that every petition was to be presented if couched in respectful terms. The petition had been put into his hands, and he had certainly declined presenting it, because he could nor conceive how this house could interfere so as to give the redress solicited.
declared, that he did not constitute himself judge to determine what petitions ought to be presented and what not. All that he had to do was to take care that they Were couched in proper and respectful terms. Whether they were to be received
78
Mr. Plumer
Sir E. Knatckbull
stated, that he was in the same predicament with the hon. members who had spoken; but he united in the opinion of the hon. gent. who had presented the petition, as to its being the duty of every member to present any petition to the house, when couched in proper terms. He therefore rose merely for the purpose of seconding the motion which had been made.—The motion was then put and carried.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, March 11.
[MINUTES.] Mr. Frankland
chairman of the Yarmouth election committee, reported that the sitting members, Messrs. Harbord and Lushington, were duly elected, and that the petition against them was not frivolous or vexatious.—On the motion of Mr. Tierney, it was ordered, that there be laid before the house a monthly return of desertions from the army, from the 1st of January to the latest period; also a return of the effective strength of the army, from which the said desertions had taken place at the same periods; also a weekly account of the number of recruits raised in the same period, distinguishing Ireland from Great Britain.—On the motion of Mr. Kenrick, it was ordered, that there be laid before the house, an account of the number of causes tried by the court of exchequer in Scotland during the last 15 years.—Mr. Herbert, after commenting briefly on the important question now before the house, touching the expulsion of one of its members, and observing that it was desirable, in addition to the report of the committee of precedents, to have every other information calculated to give a full and fair view of all parts of the case, moved, that the Proceedings of the Court Martial for the Trial of John Fenton Cawthorne, esq. colonel of the Westminster militia, laid before the house, April 8, 1796, and ordered to be printed, be now reprinted. Mr. Tierney objected to the motion on the ground of the expence, trouble, and delay of printing a voluminous mass of papers, when the question before the
79
[COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.—MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES.]
—The house went into a Committee of Supply, in which the following sums were voted, on the motion of Mr. Vansittart: "Resolved, 1. That a sum, not exceeding £196,949. 19s. 10d. be granted to his majesty, for paying off and discharging certain Annuities, after the rate of 5 per cent. per ann. being part of the annuities granted by two acts of the 37th and 42d years of his present Majesty; and that the said sum be issued and paid without any fee or other deduction whatsoever.—2. That £11,750. 14s. 6d. be granted towards completing the purchase of buildings and ground in and near Palace Yard, Westminster, in pursuance of several acts of the 44th, 45th, and 46th of his present majesty, and for carrying the said acts into execution, for the year 1807.–3. That £29,500 be granted to defray the charge of printing and stationary for the two houses of parliament, for 1807.—4. That £20,000 be granted, for defraying the expence of printing and delivering the votes of the house of commons, and for printing bills, reports, and other papers, by order of the said house, during the present session.—5. That £10,000 be granted, for defraying the expence that may be
80
81
[FREEHOLD ESTATES BILL.]
—On the motion of the Solicitor General, the report of the Freehold Estates bill was brought up.
Col. Eyre warmly
opposed the principle of the bill. He thought that it shewed much of the modern spirit of innovation; and that it would decrease the credit of the landed proprietor, to a very mischievous extent. The commercial man carried on speculations which tended to his own advantage, and the advantage of the public, and was not so likely, therefore, to be injured by this bill, while it would tend to the ruin of the man of landed property. It had been said, that the honest and considerate man would make all his debts burdens upon his estates; but in his opinion, the honest and considerate man Would act in such a manner as to render this bill totally unnecessary.
Mr.Roscoe
strenuously defended the principle of the bill; and thought the house was much indebted to the learned gent who had introduced it. As to its being an innovation, he begged to observe, that the effects of the measure proposed had been experienced every day, as it would do nothing more than make every real estate subject to a debt which every honest man would wish to see paid; and whether it was done by the act of
82
Mr. Simeon
declared himself in favour of the bill, and did not apprehend those evil consequences would result from this measure, which the hon. gent. was of opinion would be the case.
Mr. N. Calvert
declared, he saw no sufficient ground for this innovation in the law; nor did he know, nor had he ever heard of any instances of landed proprietors availing themselves of the law as it now stood, in order to cheat their creditors. He was unwilling, without a clear case of necessity being made out, to remove the old legal land marks of the constitution.
Mr. H. Martin
assured the hon. gent. that instances had occurred, which pointed out the necessity of remedying the law, as it now stood. He particularly instanced the case of a person, a considerable land-owner, who had a number of natural children, for whom he wished to provide, who had made over his real estates to trustees, and to divide the produce amongst the children. The surviving trustee had sold the whole of the landed estate, and purchased others, without charging them with any provision for these children; in this state he died; and the family in question were left in a state of abject poverty. There were other instances of as crying a nature. The present measure was not an attempt to get rid of any legal institution, but rather to afford a remedy for an existing defect.
The Solicitor-General
said, he did not wish to provoke a debate, in the present stage of the bill; at the same time, he could not but feel surprised at the consequences
83
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, March 12.
[SCOTCH JUDICATURE BILL]—Lord Grenville
adverted to the discussion which took place on Tuesday relative to the memorial of the lords of session, and to the desire which was then expressed of being informed of the opinions of the judges of the court of session respecting certain parts of the bill for the better regulation of courts of justice in Scotland. Whilst he was decidedly hostile to any proposition for receiving the opinions of the lords of session with respect to the expediency of the bill as a legislative measure, he still thought it of importance that their lordships should have the opportunity of putting questions to the judges of the court of session, or some of them, with respect to the practical effect which might be produced by any of the provisions of the bill. In making a proposition to effect this purpose, his object was to avoid all unnecessary delay, it being his earnest wish that the bill should pass through that house so as to allow a reasonable time for its discussion in the other house, and this also with a view to what, from the state of the business in par-
84
Lord Kinnaird
doubted, the propriety of hearing the lords of session at all, but if they were to be heard, whether they should not all be ordered to attend.
The Earl of Lauderdale
observed, that if all the judges of the court of session were ordered to attend, it would greatly impede the regular course of justice in Scotland.
Lord Eldon
concurred in the propriety of the motion, and suggested that the stage of the bill in which the attendance of the judges would be most useful would be in the committee.
Lord Grenville
was of opinion that no delay ought to take place in the progress of the bill, and that the house might still proceed on it in the manner originally proposed.
Lord Auckland
was anxious to have it distinctly understood, that the attendance of any of the other lords of session who might find it convenient, would be desirable.
The Lord Chancellor
approved of the motion, which he thought the only practicable mode of having the opinions of the judges of the court of session.—The motion was then agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 12.
[MINUTES.]
—A ballot took place for a committee to try and determine the merits of the petition, complaining of the election and return for the city of Dublin. The following gentlemen were appointed on the committee: Ed. Loveden Loveden, esq. J. R. M'Kenzie, esq. J. Robinson, esq. Earl of Yarmouth, T. Johnes, esq. F. Fane, esq. Sir C. Mordaunt, bart. G. Thomas, esq. A. Brown, esq. S. Horrocks, esq. N. Fellowes, J. Lemoin, esq. Sir J. P. Cotterell. Nominees, H. Parnell, esq. I. Gascoyne, esq.—
85
[WEST INDIA PLANTERS' PETITION.]—Mr. Hibbert
pursuant to notice, rose for the purpose of moving, that the Petition of the West India Planters, presented on the 27th of Feb. be referred to a select committee.—The petition was then read, as follows:
86
87
88
89
Mr. Hibbert rose
and said, that this was a petition of considerable and extensive interest. It stated the extreme hard case of a large body of his Majesty's industrious subjects, upon whose labours depended one great branch of our commerce, together with much of our maritime strength and financial prosperity, and who were reduced at length into the predicament of profiting nothing by their labours; a situation which threatened their inevitable decay and ruin. He would, in a very cursory manner, advert to the general principles of policy upon which these colonies had been established, and to that system under which they are connected with the mother country. The doctrines of the economists, and of Dr. Adam Smith in particular, had been supposed to be more adverse to that policy, and to that system, than they would, on examination, prove. Those theorists had laid down principles true and good in themselves, but not adapted to invariable practice; they had, as a sensible modern writer on colonial policy (Mr Brougham) observed, leaned too much upon positive institutions, and excluded from their consideration the influence of passion, taste, and caprice, upon the pursuits of men. It might be true, that the most safe and profitable direction of labour was to home trade, and to quick and frequent returns of capital; but in a maritime and commercial country, no legislative provisions could restrain the occasional impulse to emigrate towards new situations, and new objects of labour. Sir J. Child had rightly said, that "had England no colonies, she would entirely lose the profit of the labour of that description of her inhabitants which settle there; they would go to foreign countries, rather than not go at all." Now, if a committee of political economists were to sit, and to endeavour to turn to the best account the connection with such emigrants, would it not say, "Do not let us lose you; wherever you go, consider this as your home; send us your produce, remit us your gains; do not go to a continent where we
90
91
92
amantium irœ
93
quid pro quo,
94
In 1781 the export of sugar to all
parts, excepting Ireland, was
Cwt.
equal to about
111,095
1791 it was
267,213
1798
783,698
1799 it fell, in consequence of
acts hereinafter mentioned, to
237,062
1802, after the repeal of those
acts, it was
1,744,263
1805, it consequence of ob-
structed exports, it was
960,296
*
*
95
96
caput mortuum
caput mortuum
97
s.
d.
To the revenue for duty
27
0
To the ship owner for freight
10
0
To the underwriters for insurance
3
6
To the docks, public offices, and to merchants and brokers for commission
3
0
To the Manufacturers for goods sent out, and to the curers of fish, provisions, &c.
13
0
To the island revenues for taxes, and to white servants, medical assistance, and other contingencies there (ever and above the produce of rum)
3
0
To America, for lumber and provisions from the United States, or from the northern British colonies
3
6
—
—
63
0
98
1799 and 1800, about
10s.
9d.
1803, before the new tax, about
18s.
6d.
after new tax
12s.
6d.
1805
12s.
1806
nothing
*
*
99
100
Mr. Jacob
begged to enter his protest against the statement of the hon. gent. that either the present administration, or the one that preceded it, or that of lord Sidmouth, had been either cool or indifferent respecting the interests of the colonies. The American intercourse bill of last session shewed the attention of the present ministers to the wants and accommodation of the colonies.
Mr. Rose
felt himself called upon by the allusion to the American intercourse bill, to
101
Lord Temple
defended the American intercourse bill from the statement of the right hon. gent., who had gone so much out of his way to repeat his former opinion upon that measure. He should be happy to meet that hon. gent. on the subject, and was confident he could prove that the measure was highly beneficial to the colonies. The only difficulty that had arisen respecting it, was, that the colonies did not think it went far enough, and expected more than his majesty's ministers would or could concede.
Mr. Wilberforce
was happy that this question had been brought under consideration before the passing of the Slave Trade Abolition bill, because the distress complained of in the petition could not be imputed to that measure. He had long regretted the extraordinary increase of capital employed in procuring colonial produce; but certainly should not object to any just consideration for the distresses complained of.—The petition was then referred to a select committee.
[MUTINY BILL.] Mr. Hobhouse
brought up the report of the committee on the mutiny bill A desultory conversation ensued on the various clauses, in which Mr. Bastard, the Secretary at War, Mr. Windham, colonel Wood, Mr. Yorke, Mr. Canning, and sir John Doyle participated. All the clauses were eventually agreed to.—On the Speaker's inquiry, whether any amendments were proposed to be made in the body of the bill,
Lord Castlereagh rose
He considered the system of the right hon. secretary for the war department as too complicated to effect its own purpose. In the papers on the table was a case which satisfied his own mind that that system was wholly inadequate to maintain the necessary present force, and was calculated to involve the country in future hazard, unless some modification of it, such as that which it was his intention to propose, should be adopted by parliament. He contended, that since the defence of the country had been entrusted to the right hon. gent., it had been materially deteriorated. Indeed, the right hon. gent. seemed to admit that the home defence was inadequate to its object; for otherwise, after having blamed the predecessors of the
102
103
Mr. Secretary Windham
said, he was glad to find that the noble lord, though not uniformly, had allowed that his plan had succeeded. The fact was, that the recruiting had increased, and the desertions had diminished. The general force of the country had been augmented, and as to the home defence, unless the enemy were to meet with greater successes than those of which we were at present apprised, it would be some time before any tremendous danger could be apprehended. The noble lord had been perfectly safe in his observations on the expedition under colonel Craufurd, because he knew that it was unlit at present to divulge the object of that expedition. "But," says the noble lord, "why not "harass the enemy in some other place?" Would not this reduce the home defence of which the noble lord was so tenacious? As to activity, an injudicious and imprudent activity was more dangerous than indolence; for in military subjects he could not agree with the French proverb, which said, in the idiom of that language, "It is better to do nothings than nothing." The noble lord cried out for expeditions. What sort of precedents of expeditions had the administration, of which the noble lord had formed a part, afforded? Had not the noble lord, by sending out his expeditions, contrived to drown a great many men in the English channel, and to wreck a great many others on the enemy's coasts? As to the diminution in the energy of the volunteers, their zeal and activity had been called forth by the danger of the country; should the country again be in danger, he had no doubt that that zeal and activity would again be displayed, but at present there was no motive fur their ex-
104
Mr. Rose
stated, that calculating the expense of recruiting parties, coupled with the bounty of 18l. it made every man cost the country 38l. by the time they joined. Calculating the increased expense of Chelsea, the expense was not less than 65l. a man. The expense of Chelsea, on the present system, would amount, in time of peace, to between 700,000l. and 1,000,000l. a year.
Colonel Shipley
from his experience in his own regiment, assured the house that recruits were obtained in greater numbers and of better quality; not the debauched outcasts of the manufacturing towns, but the sons of the yeomanry, sent by their fathers to devote a part of their youth to the promotion of the glory of their country, in a war which was maintained for the preservation of the rights of mankind.
Colonel Barry
bore testimony to the same satisfactory operation of the new measures with respect to his own regiment.
105
Sir James Pulteney
repeated his former arguments against discharging men in the middle of a war. Great mischief would arise from that principle in the colonies, and with all our naval superiority, it would be found extremely difficult to transport the men backwards and forwards, as often as it would be necessary; he thought it unfair to institute a comparison between the ordinary recruiting now, and what it was while the Additional Force act subsisted. It would appear, on examination, that as great a proportion of recruits deserted now as under the former system.
Sir John Doyle rose
amidst a very general call for the question. If he had not been warned to be brief by the lateness of the hour, ha should not be so stupid as not to take the hint gentlemen were so kind as to give him. (a laugh). He was against the amendment, as it went to mix limited and unlimited service. The very objection the gentlemen opposite urged formerly against his right hon. friend's plan was, that it would have this effect; and yet they now brought forward as an amendment a principle which would have the same effect permanently, and in a much greater degree. His right hon. friend's plan had been stigmatized as visionary, theoretic, and quixotic. Its theory was, that by accomodating the service to the feelings and principles of human nature, more men would be obtained, and of a better quality. The theory of the noble lord was, that by making the situation of the soldier worse, and binding him to it for life, he would enter into it more readily, and remain in it more contented. The regiment he had the honour to command had been twice filled up so as to exceed its compliment under the present plan, thought it had at one time sent 250 men, and at another 200 to the first battalion. There was a physical as well as a moral improvement in the quality of the recruits. (Here there was a general coughing, which was stopped by a cry of order!) The hon. Bart. said, he was happy to find that the coughing did not proceed from any indisposition in the health of the house, though it might from an indisposition to hear him (a laugh). The measure produced 500 men a week since January, which was in the proportion of 26,000 a year. If this measure was visionary and quixotic, he wished we had more of such quixotism. The physical superiority of the recruits now detained was evinced by the small proportion rejected; their moral superiority by the reduced number of de-
106
Mr. Perceval
thanked the hon. general for his statement. Though not intended for that purpose, it fully corroborated many of the predictions made by himself and his friends respecting the consequences of the military plan introduced by the right hon. secretary. Frequently had he adverted to the inconveniencies and difficulties that must arise from that plan to the colonial service, from the discharge of men in time of war, &c.; but it would seem that men now crowded so thick to fill up the ranks, that all these inconveniences and difficulties would vanish before the magic operation of the new system. Yet he could not help wishing that the effects of this astonishing bill might be compared with those not only of the recruiting, but also of the parish bill. It would then be seen (and he could
107
Mr. Windham
begged to ask the learned gent. if he wished to insinuate that the hon. colonel (Craufurd) to whom he had alluded, had obtained his present appointment in consequence of any services he was supposed to have rendered government in that house?
Mr. Perceval
disclaimed any such insinuation, and observed, that he must have been wholly misunderstood by the right hon. gent.
Mr. Fawkes
begged to be allowed to make a single observation. He did not pretend to know what was the destination of the hon. colonel so strangely alluded to; but whatever might be that destination, he trusted that should that honourable officer disregard his instructions, and divert to any other purpose the force entrusted to him, but that
108
Mr. Perceval
again rose to explain, and declared, that he was likewise misunderstood by the hon. gent. who spoke last.—The house then divided on the amendment. For it 60. Against it 179. Majority against it 119. The bill was then ordered to be engrossed.—The second reading of the Roman Catholics' Army Service bill was deferred till Tuesday next, after which the house adjourned.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, March 13.
[SCOTCH JUDICATURE BILL.] Lord Grenville
moved the order of the day for the second reading of the Scotch Judicature bill. As on former occasions he had entered with some minuteness of detail into the nature of the circumstances which called for that regulation, and into the mode of carrying it into effect, he should not now trouble their lordships with a repetition of what must be so present to their recollection; but content himself with moving, that the bill be now read a second time.
The Duke of Montrose
had several objections to certain provisions of the bill, but he should not enter into a statement of them at present, as they would come more regularly before the house in another stage of the question.
The Marquis of Abercorn
was by no means aware of the extent of the innovations which the bill seemed to have in contemplation, otherwise he would Lave entered his protest against it sooner. In many respects, more particularly in the creation of new places dependent upon the crown, it went to infringe not only the spirit, but the letter of the act of union.
The Earl of Lauderdale
differed wholly from the noble marquis, and pledged himself, whenever their lordships thought proper to enter upon the question, not only to convince the house, but even that noble lord, that in no instance whatever did the measure proposed go to violate the spirit, or infringe the act of union; and that it did not provide for the creation of more places or offices than existed at that period, and subsequent to the time of the union between the two countries.—The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Monday.
109
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, March 13.
[MINUTES.]
Sir John Frederick obtained leave to bring in a bill for building a bridge over the Thames, at Vauxhall, and for making roads adjacent thereto.—The names of the defaulters on the Dublin Election ballot were read over, and lord Bruce was ordered to be taken into the custody of the serjeant at arms.—Lord Howick observed, that, when on the preceding evening he proposed that the second reading of the Roman Catholic Army and Navy Service bill should take place on Tuesday next, he was not aware of certain circumstances which would render it inconvenient to many members to attend on that day: he therefore moved, that the second reading should stand for Thursday; which was ordered accordingly. —Mr. Gooch, from the select committee appointed to try and determine the merits of the petition of Wm. Morland, esq., complaining of an undue election and return for the borough of Tau
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, March 16.
[Scotch JUDICATURE BILL.]
On the order of the day being read for going into a committee on'the Scotch judicature bill,
The Duke of Montrose
expressed himself decidedly hostile to the measure in its present shape. He conceived the proposed division of the court of session into three chambers, with a superior court of appeal, to be an infraction of the articles of union, inasmuch as the court of session Would thus no longer be the supreme court of Scotland, but would be rendered inferior to another court, namely, the court of appeal. The
110
Lord Redesdale
considered the present measure as a breach of the act of union, as, if it was carried into effect, the court of session would, in fact, no longer exist.
The Earl of Selkirk
contended that it was perfectly consistent with the act of union to make regulations for the better administration of justice in Scotland, and this measure
111
Lord Eldon
was of opinion that the proposed division of the court of session into three chambers was not consistent with the spirit of the act of union; he thought that much might be done by the mode proposed by the noble duke, by establishing two chambers, whilst, at the same time, the act of union would not be infringed. His lordship examined different provisions of the bill, and contended that they were extremely defective with respect to the directions given for resorting to trials by jury, and appeared to have been framed without a due consideration of the nature of pleadings in the court of session, which were so different to those adopted in the courts of law in Westminster-hall. He had considerable doubts respecting that part of the bill which related to trial by jury, and thought it would be better to separate it from the other. It was a most important subject, and called for the earnest and serious attention of their lordships.
Lord Grenville
thought it unnecessary for the noble and learned lord to remind their lordships that this subject demanded their earnest and anxious attention, as those by whom the measure had been brought forward had not failed to impress upon the house the great importance of the measure, and had earnestly solicited for all the assistance which could be derived for its completion, both in and out of that house. The greater part of the noble and learned lord's objections referred to particular provisions of the bill, which would be better discussed in the committee, and where it would be found that most of them had already been anticipated. No sufficient reason had, in his mind, been urged for dividing this bill into two, particularly after the subject had so long been under consideration. As to the objection that this measure was an infringement of the act of union, it did not appear to him to be in the least well founded. It was clear that there existed an absolute necessity for remedying the evils Which resulted from the accumulation of business in the court of session more than that court could possibly get through, and the accumulation of appeals in that house. The necessity of some remedy was so evident, that those noble lords who objected to
112
Lord Melville
declared himself friendly to the principle of diminishing the number of lords of session. He had formerly proposed a bill for diminishing their number to ten; but he confessed he thought the proposition of the noble lord for dividing them into three chambers, much more preferable. He doubted, however, the propriety of establishing a court of review, which he thought an infringement of the act of union, whilst, at the same time, it would not tend' to diminish the number of appeals to that house, as the litigants would still be anxious to appeal to the last resort. With respect to the trial by jury, he did not think it would be productive of those beneficial effects which were looked for by the proposers of the bill; it was ill suited to the habits of the people of Scotland, neither did they wish for its introduction.
The Earl of Lauderdale
quoted the 18th and 19th articles of union, for the purpose of proving that the present measure was no infringement upon that act, there being an express reservation that regulations might be adopted for the administration of justice, consistently with public policy, and for the evident utility of the subject. The division of the court of session into three chambers, and the establishment of a court of review, were questions of public policy, respecting which parliament had undoubtedly the power of deciding. The court of session had formerly established regulations by acts of sederunt for the more speedy administration of justice, and it were absurd to suppose that parliament had not tie paramount power to enforce regulations for the better
113
The Earl of Mansfield
after modestly apologising for offering himself to the attention of the house upon such a subject, expressed himself of the same opinion with the noble lord (Melville), and cited an opinion delivered by that great lawyer, the earl of Mansfield, that the introduction of the trial by jury in Scotland, so far from being advisable, might be attended with much hazard in the experiment; so totally unsuited was it to the habits and prejudices of the people.—The house then went into a committee
pro forma
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, March 16.
[MINUTES.] Mr. Eyre
chairman of the committee appointed to try the merits of the petition complaining of an undue election for the borough of Guildford, reported, that Mr. Sumner was not duly elected, and that the petitioner, the hon. Chapple Norton, was duly elected; but that the opposition of Mr. Sumner to the petition was not frivolous or vexatious. The clerk of the crown was ordered to attend the next day to amend the return, by erasing the name of Mr. Sumner, and inserting that of Mr. Norton in its place.—On the motion of Mr. Hobhouse, it was ordered that, at the rising of the house that day, lord Bruce, who had been taken into the custody of the serjeant at arms, in consequence of default at the election ballot, should be discharged, on paying his fees.—On the motion of lord Temple, a new writ was ordered for the election of a member for the borough of Buckingham, in the room of sir W. Young, who had accepted the office of governor of the island of Tobago.—Mr. Courtenay moved, that the order for the consideration of the Culross election petition, be deferred to the 16th of May. Sir J. Anstruther said, that though the sitting member was willing to agree to a reasonable
114
[SLAVE TRADE ABOLITION BILL.] Lord H. Petty
moved the order of the day for the third reading of the Slave Trade Abolition bill.
Mr. Hibbert rose
and said:—I do not rise, sir, with the vain hope of changing, by any observations of mine, the determination which the house has expressed, in a manner so decided, upon this question, but rather with an anxious wish to record an opinion, grounded on consistent principles, and unaltered by any thing which I have heard upon a subject so interesting and important. In adherence to consistency, which, rather than popularity, is my object, I shall appear to differ more with the prevailing sentiment of the house than some of my hon. friends have done, who have yet united with me in opposition to this measure; for, after the concessions which they have made upon the points of legality, humanity, and justice, I do not see how we can sit down and deliberate Upon the policy and expediency of keeping open the trade; we fall, too, in so doing, under the censure of the hon. member for Bedford, (Mr. Whitbread) who thinks that in the debate we have "given too much into cool discussion." In which reprehension he includes, I presume, the noble lord (Howick) who introduced bill into the house, and. the noble lord (H. Petty) who sits upon the same bench, and who certainly did not, either of them, encourage that declamatory tone which has too much prevailed in this debate. The hon. member himself took care nut to copy their
115
116
117
118
*
*
† Bruce, 4to. vol. I. p. 3
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
participes criminis,
132
Sir Philip Francis
had never said, that the persons engaged in the slave trade were out of the protection of the law. What he had stated on a former night was, that he would not be a party to any proceeding of that house, which should pledge to any compensation for any future losses that might arise front any measure under discussion. He had asserted that, on general principles, them could be no claim for losses sustained by a transaction which the house had declared to be contrary to justice, humanity, and policy; and he still adhered to that opinion. He had gone further with respect to Trinidad; for that was a modern establishment, and the speculations had been undertaken in that island, with a knowledge of the resolution
133
Mr. Lytleton
though he had not the presumption to suppose that he could place the arguments that had already been employed in the different stages of this measure in a stronger light, or a more persuasive form, could not yet content himself with giving a silent vote upon this occasion. The slave trade was so enormous and horrible, that there was no parallel to it in the annals of the world. He was glad that the measure of its abolition was at length arrived at its last stage; though he was sorry that any alteration had been made in the preamble, because he could not reconcile to himself any compromise upon the subject. He was convinced that none of the imputed consequences would follow from the adoption of the measure.
Mr. Henry Thornton
observed, that it did not signify to the house what Leo Africanus or Mr. Park might have thought of the slave trade, as they were themselves more competent to decide upon the facts before them. In a communication which he had with Mr. Park, however, that gentleman, though he studiously avoided giving any decisive opinion as to the effects of the abolition of the slave trade, admitted that the justice of such a measure did not allow of an argument. This measure would not only throw wide open the doors of civilization for Africa, but lay the first stone for the establishment of the happiness of the West Indies. As this country was the balance for the great power on the continent, they ought to attend to the grounds upon which its means were founded, and particularly in its colonies. Measures were to be taken for the improvement of the condition of the mass of the people in the sister kingdom; an hon. gent. of great weight in that house (Mr. Whitbread) from his character and talents, had brought forward measures for the improvement of the mass of the people in this country; measures had on a former occasion been taken to correct abuses which were said to have existed in the East Indies; and he would ask, whether it was not right that they should take measures for the improvement of the West India islands? He had paid particular attention to the case of the slaves, and he agreed that the system was more severe. than any
134
Captain Herbert
thought the measure fraught with ruin to the colonies and the commercial prosperity of the country. He complained of the style of declamation and common-place expressions of justice and humanity, generally delivered with munch eloquence, with which this measure had been supported. It was foolish, if not blasphemous, for them to graft on their theories the character of the dispensations of Divine Providence. They ought to consider the good that this measure might do to Africa, and the evil it might do to ourselves, and, having
135
Mr. T. W. Plummer
was as much an advocate for liberty as any man, but thought it very dangerous to propagate such an idea among the unenlightened negroes. It war to be recollected how much Great Britain bad already lost in her colonial strength, by the discussion of these abstract principles; to that she owed the revolt and loss of her American colonies, and it behoved her to be aware of propagating notions of political right among a people so unintelligent and so easily provoked to revolt as the negroes. With regard to the supply of negroes to the colonies, as it appeared on all hands at least questionable point, that the negro population could be kept up without any farther importation, he recommended rather a suspension of the trade than a total abolition, in order that an experiment might be fairly made upon this important question.
Mr. Barham
said, that the total time of labour was only ten hours. The whip of driver was never used, though it was formerly; and it was no more used now than the mace was to knock down members in the lobby. Neither the drivers nor white servants had power to punish without consent of the masters. The negroes preferred the
136
Mr. H. Thornton
still maintained that he was correct in the points he had stated.
Mr. Secretary Windham
remarked, that although the overseers of plantations made use of the whip, that did not prove that the negroes were treated with cruelty; but, alter all, it was not the intention of the house to abolish slavery, but the slave trade. Therefore, when the anti-abolitionists spoke of the miserable condition of the slaves, they were arguing against themselves, inasmuch as it was no part of the present bill to abolish slavery in the West Indies. Slavery was as ancient as the days of Homer, who said, take from a man his liberty, and you take from him his virtue. Still slavery was a degrading situation for man, and it was to be wished that it could be abolished. Slavery, however, differed very much, as to degree, in different countries; and he could not but believe, upon the testimony adduced, that the authority exercised over the negroes in the West Indies was much less than in most other countries where slavery existed at all. But even if this measure were carried, slavery would continue in the West Indies; and those advocates for the measure were not consistent with themselves, who argued from principles of strict right and justice in favour of the present measure, and yet did not follow up their own principles, by emancipating the present slaves in the West Indies. The right hon. secretary proceeded to observe, that on such a question, the house ought not to go upon abstract principles of right, but upon the consideration of the consequences of the measure, and the possible ruin of the British empire resulting from it. As to Africa, this measure would produce no benefit to that country, for there would not be less slavery after our abolishing the trade than before it: in the West Indies it would tend to produce discontent among the negroes; to individuals it would be a great loss and injustice, and would prove ruinous to numbers who had a claim to the protection of this country. France and other rival nations would most probably refuse to imitate our example, and would redouble this traffic to our ruin. Nor was this a time
137
Mr. Sheridan
replied to his right hon. friend, who, in saying that the same arguments which applied to the abolition of the slave trade, also applied to the abolition of slavery, had blended two things which ought to be kept distinct. The one was in our power, the other was in our hope, but not at present in our power. With respect to the treatment of slaves in the West Indies, he wanted no testimony on that subject. Despotism must lead to cruelty. As in the words of Shakespeare, "Mercy is twice blest, it blesseth him that gives, and him that takes;" so despotism was twice cursed. It cursed him that exercised it, and him on whom it was exercised. He trusted, therefore, that the present measure was the preamble of the future; but at the same time he was aware that the ultimate step must I taken with the utmost tenderness, caution and deliberation. To give immediate freedom to men who had always been accustomed to slavery, would be productive of the most serious consequences. With regard to the wealth derived from the West Indies, we had paid for it more than "human sinew bought and sold" ever produced to this coun-
138
Lord Castlereagh
lamented his difference in opinion from his hon. friend (Mr Wilberforce). However the right hon. gent. who had just sat down, might, by the superior brilliancy of his genius and ingenuity of argument, disguise the question, it was possible that the measure now before the house could ever accomplish what the liberal mind of his hon. friend had for so many years in contemplation. The only result would be, that perhaps the attachment to the mother country would be a little shaken, the people in our West India colonies might be driven to import contrary to the wish and order of parliament, end the number of deaths would most probably be increased.
Mr. Wilberforce
called most seriously the attention of the house to the point to which the question was now brought. They had for the present no object immediately before them, but that of putting a stop directly to the carrying men in British ships to be sold as slaves in the British islands in the West Indies. If that measure was to be shortly carried into execution, he should think that his labour for these 19 years past would be amply rewarded: but still, he must confess, that he should have another object after that in view, and that he looked forward to a still more happy change in the state of the negroes in the West India islands. According to the plain rules of common sense, his logi-
139
Mr. Windham
stated, in explanation, that his opinions on this question had been uniformly guided by the authority of Mr. Burke, who had entertained an idea of the gradual abolition of slavery, and of course of the slave trade, in a manner totally different from that proposed by the present measure.
Mr. Wilberforce
observed, that the right hon. gent. had never mentioned the name of Mr. Burke in his speech, and therefore had no right to shelter himself under his authority. The plan the right hon. gent. had alluded to, he had often requested to see, and could never obtain a sight of. This, however, he could aver, that Mr. Burka had often stated both in private and in that house, to him and to many others, that he had abandoned his former ideas on the subject, and thought exactly as they did.
Mr. Windham
appealed to the house, whether he had not quoted the authority of Mr. Burke.
Mr. Barham
stated that the plan of Mr. Burke had been put into his hands, for the purpose of his making sonic observations in
140
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, March 17.
[MINUTES.]
—The house ballotted for committees to take into consideration the petitions complaining of undue returns for Glasgow and for Newry, but the reduced list for the latter place only was presented at the bar. The names were as follow: G H. Cavendish, esq. hon. M. G. J. Stewart, J. Grimston, esq. J. Smith, esq. right hon. W. Dundas, lord C. Fitzroy, J Dent, esq. G. Wentworth, esq. T. Steele, esq. T Codrington, esq. sir W. Curtis, right hon. C. Bathurst, lord C. H. Somerset. Nominees —lord Temple, R. M. Biddulph, esq.
[LIVERPOOL PLANTERS' PETITION.]— Mr. Roscoe
presented a Petition of several planters, merchants, and others, at the port of Liverpool, interested in the British West India colonies, setting forth, "That the petitioners have, for a long time past, felt severely the pressure of the heavy duties on Sugar, the produce of the British West India colonies, though they have hitherto endeavoured to sustain them, aware of the exigencies of the public service, and hoping that the period was not far remote, when, by the happy event of the restoration of peace, their burthens would be lightened; and that the petitioners now find these hopes not only rendered distant, by the failure of the late negociation, but by the new Plan of Finance lately submitted to the house by the chancellor of the exchequer, in danger of being altogether destroyed, it being the effect of this plan to render permanent that part of the duties on Sugar which, by the existing laws, would cease with the war, a circumstance which the petitioners view with great alarm; and that these duties press at present with peculiar severity on the petitioners, and all persons connected with the West India colonies, in consequence of those measures of hostility against British commerce, which the recent successes of the enemy have enabled him to enforce in almost all the ports of the continent, whereby exportation has been impeded to an extent hitherto unexampled, and the natural effects of an overcharged market have been and are felt in a ruinous depression of prices; and that the petitioners acknowledge with thankfulness the measures which have already been taken by the house with a view to their
141
[PETITION FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD AGAINST THE ROMAN CATHOLIC ARMY SERVICE BILL.] The Marquis of Titchfield
presented a petition from the chancellor, masters, and scholars, of the university of Oxford; taking notice of the bill for enabling his majesty to avail himself of the services of all his liege subjects in his naval and military forces, in the manner therein mentioned; and setting forth, "That the petitioners contemplate, with much concern and anxiety, the progress of a bill, which in their apprehension, if it should pass into a law, will break down one of the strongest barriers, raised by the wisdom of our ancestors, for the defence and security of our civil and religious establishments; and that the petitioners cannot look forward without very serious alarm to the consequences of repealing so important a portion of the statute 25 Car. II. cap. 2, commonly called the Test act, and of granting to persons of all religious persuasions an unrestrained admission into situations even of the highest naval and military command; and that the petitioners see much reason to apprehend that the said bill, if it should pass into a law, may lead to the removal also of every similar restraint in matters of civil concern, and to the abrogation of all
142
[ABOLITION OF SLAVERY.] Earl Percy rose
in pursuance of the notice he had given to move for leave to bring in a bill for the gradual abolition of slavery in his majesty's colonies in the West Indies. His lordship expatiated feelingly on the wanton cruelties exercised on the unhappy negroes in the plantations, as developed in the late discussions. The object of his bill was to prevent the repetition of horrors, at the very idea of which every man in that house must shudder. If it had been established, as he trusted it had been established, that the slave trade was contrary to the principles of justice, humanity and sound policy, and that therefore it ought to be abolished; it necessarily followed, that slavery itself was contrary to the principles of justice, humanity and sound policy, and ought also to be abolished. It was, however, by no means his intention to propose any immediate abolition; what he had in view was, that the children of slaves born after a certain time to be fixed by the legislature, should be free; and thus a gradual and ultimately a total extinction of this barbarous usage would takes place. His lordship concluded with moving" That leave be given to bring in a bill, for the gradual abolition of slavery in his majesty's colonies in the West Indies." On the question being put.
Lord Henry Petty
although it was possible for him not to respect the motives and participate in the feelings of his noble friend, yet deprecated any discussion of this subject at the present moment. The abolition of the slave trade, and emancipation of the slaves, were two distinct questions;
143
Mr. Eden
said, that in all great and important questions time was given for the parties, whose interests were affected, to petition against the measure. The present motion was precipitate, and precluded the parties from that opportunity. He would also ask, was the noble lord or any one else prepared to offer any remuneration to the colonists, if they should be deprived of the services of the slaves and their children? This was a measure which would be fraught with ruin to the colonists, and should therefore have his decided opposition.
Sir C. Pole
while he deprecated the motion as fraught with the most dangerous consequences, said, he rejoiced that it had been brought forward thus early, because it shewed the cloven foot, which had been attempted to be concealed: he believed that this was one main object in view by the abolitionists. It was fraught with much evil, and he trusted it would open the eyes of the public, to the intentions of the promoters of those measures.
Mr. Wilberforce
had the motion proceeded from a less respectable quarter, would have been as glad as the hon. baronet that it had been made, because it would shew that he (Mr. W.), and those who thought with him, made the distinction between the abolition of the trade and the emancipation of the slaves, and not only abstained from proposing the latter, but were ready to reject such a proposition when made by others. How much soever he looked forward with anxious expectation to the period when the negroes might with safety be liberated; he knew too well the effect which the long continuance of abject slavery produced upon the human mind, to think of their immediate emancipation; a measure, which, at the present moment, would be injurious to them, and ruinous to the colonies. He, and those who acted with him, were satisfied
144
Captain Herbert
deprecated any discussion on this subject. If a hope remained that the colonies might be saved, the only mode of realizing that hope, would be by shewing that the house would not for a moment admit the proposal for emancipation.
Mr. Sheridan
after the anxious expectation which he had last night expressed, that the bill then passed was but the preamble of the ultimate measure of emancipation, thought that he should be guilty of the grossest inconsistency in giving a silent vote on the present question. With these sentiments he need scarcely say, that the noble earl had his thanks for having directed the attention of the house to this important subject, even at that early period. The noble earl's statement had been misrepresented. He had never proposed to enfranchise the living negroes; his measure, as he understood him, was to commence with infants born after a period, which would remain a matter of future parliamentary discussion. The planters were entitled to fair dealing on this subject. If the house meant to say, that by abolishing the slave trade they had done all that duty demanded, and that they would leave the emancipation of the slaves to the hazard of fortuitous circumstances, let them be explicit, and say so; but if there lurked in any man's mind a secret desire to proceed in that business, a secret conviction that more ought to be done than had been done, it was unmanly, it was dishonourable, not to speak out. For one, he would boldly declare that he had further views; he hoped, that the young nobleman who had done his feelings so much credit, by the proposition which he that evening made, would stand to his ground. If he persevered in the pursuit of his object with the same zeal as his Hon. friend (Mr. Wilberforce) had done, he had no doubt that he would meet with the same success An hon bart. had talked of a cloven foot; he pleaded guilty to the cloven foot, but he would say that of the man who expressed pleasure at the hope of seeing so large a portion of the human race freed from the
145
146
"I would not have a slave to till my ground,
"To carry me, to fan me when I sleep,
And tremble when I wake, for all the wealth
That sinews bought and sold have ever earn'd."
Mr. Wilberforce
in explanation, denied ever having disavowed his wish that freedom should ultimately be communicated to the slaves. He had deprecated the discussion at present, because he looked to the gradual improvement of their minds, and to the diffusion among them of those domestic charities which would render them more fit, than he feared they now were, to bear emancipation.
Mr. Peter Moore
however strongly he had advocated the abolition, was against immediate emancipation. The abolition would ameliorate the condition of the slaves, by forcing the West India planters to treat them well, and they would ultimately be prepared to receive freedom. He hoped the noble lord would withdraw his motion, that he would turn his mind to the object with deliberation, and look at it remotely.
Mr.
Manning
Sir C. Pole
moved that the house be counted. Only 35 members being present, the House immediately adjourned.
HUOSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, March 18.
[SLAVE TRADE ABOLITION BILL.] Mr. Wilberforce
lord Howick, and several members of the house of commons, brought up the Slave Trade Abolition bill, agreed to with amendments.
Lord Grenville
called the attention of the house to this subject, which he considered one of the most important that could occupy the attention of their lordships. With respect to the amendments made in this bill, he was satisfied they were calculated to carry its principles better into effect. It was, however, necessary, that time should be given for consideration, and he therefore moved that the bill, with the amend
147
[SCOTCH JUDICATURE BILL.] Lord Grenville
said, that in consequence of what had passed in the late discussion of this measure, and of the consideration which he had since been enabled to give to the subject, he thought it would be more advisable to empower the committee to separate all that part of the bill which related to trial by jury, from the other parts which related to the division of the court of session into three chambers, and the formation of a court of review. He thought this mode would be better than that of which notice had been given on the former night of discussion by a noble and learned lord, namely, to strike out in the committee all the clauses which related to trial by jury, as, if this latter mode was adopted, it might lead to a supposition that it was intended to abandon altogether the proposed introduction of trial by jury. On the contrary, he hoped that that part of the plan would ultimately be adopted by their lordships. As, however, there was considerable difference with respect to the means of carrying this desirable object into effect, and as, with respect to the division of the court of session into three chambers, there was scarcely any difference of opinion, and but little on the subject of the formation of the court of review, these parts of the plan might be adopted with much less delay, if considered in a separate bill, than if they remained incorporated with the clauses relating to trial by jury. He should therefore move to postpone the committee to Monday, intending, on that day, to move the instruction which he had before stated, and in the consideration of that part of the subject respecting the division of the court of session and the court of review, it was his intention to propose several amendments.
Lord Eldon
thanked the noble lord for having thus given farther time for the consideration of that part of the subject which was involved in considerable difficulty, namely, the trial by jury. He had no doubt that the trial by jury might, in some cases, be beneficially introduced into Scotland; but great consideration would be required with respect to the means of carrying it into effect, in order that it might not produce injury instead of good. With respect to the other part of the subject, he would give it every consideration in his power, and en
148
The Lord Chancellor
declined entering at present into a detailed consideration of the subject, but he had no doubt that in the proper stage of the bill he should be able to convince their lordships that the difficulties in the way of the introduction of trial by jury in civil cases into Scotland were much less than were apprehended; that, on the contrary, it would be comparatively an easy task, whilst at the same time it would be a most beneficial measure to that country.
Lord Melville
merely wished to throw out for consideration the necessity which in his opinion existed of adopting means to bring causes to greater maturity in the outer house, without which he thought the proposed measure would not produce any thing like the beneficial effect expected from it. With this view he thought it would be more advisable to have only two chambers in the inner house, whose sole business it should be to review the decisions given in the outer house, where, from the larger portion of time allowed to the judges for transacting business, that business might be done well. If, however, it was determined to have three chambers, he thought that one of those chambers should be allotted solely to the business of the outer house, in which case, from the single responsibility attached to the judges, every thing that could result from efficiency and from solemnity of decision might be expected. His only object was, that the measure should undergo the most serious and attentive discussion.
The Earl of Lauderdale rose
chiefly for the purpose of doing away any impression that might result from what had been said by the noble viscount, that his noble friend, who had proposed the measure, had not given to it the most anxious consideration. He agreed with the noble viscount in the necessity of adopting some means of doing the business in the outer house in a better manner, as it had been calculated that a lord of session, in consequence of the multiplicity of other business, had only 63 hours in
149
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, March 18.
[MINUTES.] Lord Stopford
read at the bar the report of the Colchester election committee, declaring Robert Thornton, esq. duly elected, and that the petition, as far as the same relates to the said R. Thornton, was not frivolous or vexatious; and also that W. Tuffnell, esq. was duly elected, and that the petition, so far as relates to the said W. Tuffnell, did appear to the committee to be frivolous and vexatious.—Mr. Vansittart gave in at the bar a special report of the Shrewsbury committee, stating the absence of one of its members, and the cause assigned for such absence, namely, sudden indisposition. A medical gentleman attended, and proved at the bar the illness of Mr. Windham Quin, and the impossibility, in consequence thereof, of his attendance on the said committee. Leave was then given to the committee to adjourn till Saturday next.
[ROMAN CATHOLICS ARMY AND NAVY SERVICE BILL.]—Lord Howick
rose and addressed the house as follows:—Sir, since I had the honour of introducing into this house, a bill for allowing dissenters of every description, to enter into his majesty's military and naval services, under certain restrictions, circumstances have occurred which have twice induced me to move for the postponement of the second reading of that bill. I now rise to state, that the same circumstances still continue to operate, and that I shall not be prepared to-morrow to propose the second reading. Not being able to ascertain on what day it may be in my power to proceed with this bill, I think it consistent with my public duty to make this statement, in consequence of which the order of the day for the second reading will be dropped, to be revived as the house may think fit. I am aware, sir, that this intimation must attract much observation, and that the house and the public will naturally expect some information with respect to the motives of it.
150
[MR. PAULL'S PETITION RESPECTING THE WESTMINSTER ELECTION.]
On the motion of lord H. Petty, the house went into the further consideration of Mr. Paull's Petition respecting the Westminster Election.
Mr. Sheridan rose
and said, that he was aware that standing in the situation he did, he was entitled to comment upon, and to sum up all the evidence that had been adduced in support of the allegations contained in the petition now before the house. He should, however, wave that right; the evidence was in the hands of every member of that house, and he was not anxious, if he could do so, to add to the impression testimony of such a nature must have already produced; he would content himself with one remark, which was, that that evidence, weak and futile as it was, did not say more to its own confusion than would have been proved by witnesses unimpeachable, which he (Mr. Sheridan), had the house thought it necessary, was ready to bring forward. As an instance, he should mention merely Mr. Weatherhead himself. When an inquiry was made as to his services in the navy, he confessed himself not quite satisfied with the return of the navy office. A noble lord (Folkestone) was equally dissatisfied, but upon different grounds. The noble lord seemed to think that this Mr. Weatherhead had been calumniated, and accordingly the noble lord moved for a return at once more exact and comprehensive. What had been the issue of this attempt to rescue the character of Mr Weatherhead from this supposed slander? Why, in truth, no more than this: that he, Mr. Weatherhead, had not served in one ship only, but in twelve or thirteen, that he had continued in one ship a year, in another three months, in a third a month, in a fourth three weeks, and in a fifth five days; running, as it were, the
151
Mr. M. A. Taylor rose
and said:—Sir; when this question first came before the
152
153
154
Lord Folkestone
said, he had all along acted in this business from a sense of justice and propriety, and a firm belief that the witnesses to be adduced in support of the allegations in the petition, would have clearly and consistently proved them; and though he would not say that the whole of the witnesses had been consistent, or had given their testimony without some difference, yet he thought enough had been proved, by consistent testimony, to sustain the allegations in the petition, in such a manner as to vindicate Mr. Paull, and the agents who acted confidentially for him, against the charge of conspiracy alledged by the hon. member who last spoke Of the character or testimony of Weatherhead, he did not wish to say much; but he thought hat a weak cause, the defence of which rested upon no other ground than that of impeaching the characters of those who came forward to give testimony against it. If, however, it could be shewn, from the evidence itself, that there was in it no such inconsistency as that now alledged, he hoped that it would be admitted, that the arguments of the hon. gent. must, in a great measure, fall to the ground. Laying no stress at all on the testimony of Weatherhead, he yet was of opinion, that the evidence of Drake was consistent with itself, in all its parts. He was examined and cross-examined at the bar of that house, by men of the first talents in the country: and, except in a point or two of no importance, he could find no inconsistency in his evidence. The hon. gent. who last spoke, had assumed in the first instance, that the letter which had been mentioned as written by Mr. Sheridan, and in the hands of Emanuel Harris, was a forgery. This however, did not appear from any evidence before the house. If it really was a forgery, certainly Drake must be guilty of the most criminal conduct: but was it possible, if that were the case, that he should be so anxious for the production of a letter which must have furnished evidence against himself? The hon. gent. too, had endeavoured to implicate Mr. Powell, and the other agents of Mr. Paull, in a charge of conspiracy, by joining with Drake, in the endeavour
155
l.
156
Mr. M. A. Taylor
assured the noble lord he had no idea whatever of charging either Mr. Paull or Mr. Powell, with being engaged in the conspiracy, but confined the charge solely to the witnesses produced at the bar of the house.
Mr. Whitbread
said, he had heard with surprize the declaration made by the noble lord at the outset, and with still greater surprize, the expressions with which he had closed. He would not travel out of the evidence before the house, but from that alone he would prove the falsehood of the witnesses adduced in support of the petition, and establish their infamy out of their own mouths. The allegations of the petition were, that the sitting member had by himself and by other persons offered money to suppress or corrupt the evidence to be offered before the committee, which was to try his right to his seat. Was there any proof that Mr. Sheridan had taken any pains to get Mr. Drake out of the way, who was the principal witness to prove these charges? The noble lord said, Mr. Sheridan had strove to get the letter from Harris. Was there any proof of that? And if there was any proof that any person whomsoever in Mr. Sheridan's interest did in any one instance utter a word like tampering (as he believed there was not), what proof was there that such person was Mr. Sheridan's agent any more than Mr. Paull's. If it was proved that some of the allegations of the petition were absolutely false, and there was no proof that the others were true, was it not to be naturally concluded that the whole were false? In answer to the first question asked him at the bar of the house, who he was, Drake answered he was an acting lieutenant of the navy. That was proved by the Returns of the Navy Office to be false. He said, he lost his leg in the battle of Camperdown; it was proved he lost it long after that battle, in consequence of a fall from the mast, which rendered amputation necessary. He said he had ten or twelve different pensions from the king, in consequence of wounds he had received. It was proved he had only one pension from the Chest at Greenwich. Let the noble lord, if he could, make out a consistent evidence for this man, after these falsehoods. The noble lord wished to
157
158
159
Mr. M. A. Taylor
then moved, that William Drake, in giving his evidence, was guilty of wilful falsehood and gross prevarication. Agreed to.—Mr T. also moved that William Drake, for the said offence, be committed to his majesty's gaol of Newgate, and that the Speaker do issue his warrant accordingly. Ordered.
Mr. Whitbread
observed, that though the other witnesses for the petitioner had grossly misconducted themselves, he did not think it necessary to have recourse to any further severity, and therefore would propose no motion with respect to them.
[FREEHOLD ESTATES BILL.] The Solicitor General
moved the order of the day for the third reading of the bill for rendering the Freehold Estates of persons who die insolvent, assets for the payment of their simple contract debts.
Mr. Tuffnell
said, that he did not doubt the present bill would operate in a considerable degree to enlarge the credit of freehold proprietors, and facilitate the raising of large sums of money, which, to many, would be a considerable source of prosperity; but, at the same time, it must obviously be productive of considerable inconvenience, and in many cases of much mischief to the creditor, who having no means to come at any precise knowledge of the debts already due by the freehold proprietor, or the settlements made upon his estate, would feel himself much disappointed, upon the demise of his debtor, to find debts to a much larger amount than he expected charged upon that property to which he looked for his security. This would necessarily give rise to litigations without end, and set the new creditor upon endeavouring to find out flaws in the settlements which preceded his claims, with a view to set them aside for his own advantage; and thus, in many instances, the creditors, for whose security this bill was avowedly designed, would have just reason to complain that their property was injured rather than served, through a measure which would teach them to advance large sums, and to rely often upon a hollow security. He thought too, that it was unfair to place the freehold property of the country on such a footing, while the copyhold was exempt; and peculiarly severe to involve the whole of the former, merely for the faults of a few men. He was convinced the learned gent. who introduced this bill, was amply competent to devise means for his purpose much more eligible. He concluded by expressing a hope that the bill would be re
160
The Speaker
observed, that in the present stage of the bill, it was too late after it had been engrossed, to have it recommitted.
Mr. Simeon
defended the bill. He stated that the present bill was not a new idea of the hon. and learned gentleman's who brought it in, but that a bill similar to the present, and still more extensive, as including copyhold property, was brought in, in the year 1772, by a most learned lawyer, Mr. Ambler, and had passed through that house at a time when there were a great many very eminent lawyers who had seats there. It was lost afterwards in the lords, in a very thin house, when 7 voted against it and but 5 for it. He could easily state many cases of the most severe injustice which could be practised under the present law. Country bankers might purchase landed estates with the money of other people, and these estates would descend to their heirs free from all their debts as bankers. As a master in chancery, many cases came before him, where creditors for considerable sums stated that they did not think it worth their while to prove their debts, as they had no specialties, and the property of the deceased was principally in landed estates. He considered this property of freehold estates not being liable to those debts, as a mere remnant of antiquity, that had been kept up long after the reason of it had ceased.
The Master of the Rolls
upon such a proposition as that which was then before the house, a proposition which, if it was carried into effect, would make a most material change in the law of the land, felt it to be his duty to state his sentiments most fully and explicitly on the subject. In so doing, it was necessary, first, that he should, endeavour to bring to the recollection of the house, that it was only under the feudal laws that freehold property was first established; and it was impossible for any man to tell what further change the present innovation might lead to. By the old law of France, the moment a man was married, one half of his property was secured for the benefit of his children; by the present law of Scotland in certain cases, the whole property was secured by law to their heirs: but did any man ever say that these laws were unjust? They might be deemed impolitic in many instances, but they certainly were not unjust. It had been said that it would be unjust that the heir to an estate
161
162
Mr. C. Wynne
observed, that the frequent passing of acts of insolvency was a proof of the defect of our laws with relation to debtor and creditor. As the law now stood, a man who advanced a sum of money to another would take care to have the best security possible for the recovery of the amount of that debt, whilst the honest and industrious tradesman would for the most part suffer for the want of a similar security.
Mr. Calvert
declared, that he had conversed with several persons upon this subject, but he never heard of such frauds as had been alluded to this night. The men of landed property he now heard represented as being the rich and the oppressors, and the commercial part of the community were spoken of as a poor and distressed set of people. The very reverse of this he believed to be the fact. The landed property men were the sheep, whom the minister, whoever he was, could easily lay hold of and sheer at pleasure; when, if a minister attempted to lay his hands on any particular branch of commerce, there were meetings in every coffee-house in London, and in many cases they escaped from his grasp.
The Lord Advocate
of Scotland observed, that it was a peculiarity in the English law, which was unknown to the ancient Greeks or Romans, or to any modern state in Europe, that the death of a man should put an end to all the moral obligations which he owed the world. He was himself, in the proper sense of the word, a strong aristocrat; but he did not think it right to support the aristocracy by such means as the law now sanctioned. In Scotland and in Germany a most high and honourable sentiment of the antiquity and greatness of families prevailed; but still they did not allow a man to roll in the wealth which had been
163
Mr. Canning
compared the present to a law which had formerly been introduced for the regulation of country banker, by making their estates liable to their debts. Lord Kenyon observed upon that measure, that it would be necessary that every banker should have a map of his estate and catalogue of the incumbrances on it hung up in his house. A measure of that sort had been adopted in Ireland, and the only result was, that it increased commercial property, and rendered the estates unsaleable. Such, he contended, would be the result of the present measure, if it was to be adopted by the house.
The Solicitor General rose
to reply. He had listened with the most patient attention to the objections that had been urged against the measure, both in and out of that house, not with a view technically to advocate it more effectually, but with the determination wholly to abandon it, should those objections appear to him to possess any weight. The result, however, was, that the sentiments with which he sat out on the subject, remained unaltered. He was decidedly of opinion, that to exempt an estate from the payment of debts contracted by its late possessor, was a most flagrant act of injustice. He was
164
The Master of the Rolls
explained, and assured his hon. and learned friend, that he never intended to throw an imputation on the bill before the house, or on the fair intention of its learned mover.
The Solicitor General
was sorry to have misunderstood his rt. hon. friend, and assured him that nothing was farther from his mind than to give a moment's pain to his right hon. friend.—The question was now loudly
165
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 19.
[MINUTES.]
—The following members were chosen to try the merits of the Lanark election petition: lord G. H. Cavendish, J. F. Cawthorne, esq., lord R. E. H. Somerset, C. Chester, esq., hon. W. Gore, T. Wood, esq., E. Harvey, esq., T. Thornton, Esq., W. Bagwell, esq., lord Brooke, right hon. R. P. Carew. Nominees: C. Dundas, esq., J. Paterson, esq.—The Secretary at War rose, pursuant to notice, tomove for leave to bring in a bill for paying the allowances to half-pay officers, their widows, and persons on the Compassionate List, at their own residences. In the object of this bill all would agree. It was one which was very desirable, if it could be effected, and he could anticipate no objection to it. He therefore need not trouble the house at length on the subject. He concluded by moving for leave to bring in two bills, the one to pay the allowance as above, and the other to enable the Kilmainham hospital commissioners to make regulations for the more easy add speedy payment of pensions. Agreed to.—Lord H. Petty obtained leave to bring in a bill to rectify an error in the act of last session, for settling additional allowances on the younger branches of the royal family.— Mr. Vansittart obtained leave to bring in a bill for extending to the outports the provisions of the custom-house office reform bill, and for applying to the superannuated fund such retrenchments as may be made in consequence of that extension.—The Advocate General presented to the house, according to order, a bill to authorize the payment of Prize Money, arising from captures made by ships of his Sicilian majesty in conjunction with British ships, to the Sicilian envoy, for the use of the officers and men of such ships; and the same was received, and read the first time.—The Serjeant at Arms at the bar informed the house, that pursuant to order he had taken the rt. hon. R. B. Sheridan into custody as a defaulter at one of the late calls of the house. It was ordered that Mr. Sheridan should be discharged at the rising of the house this day, paying his fees. Shortly after Mr. Sheridan left the bar, where he was held in custody, and advanced to the treasury bench; upon which the Speaker called order! order! and observed that nothing could be more irregular thou the en-
166
[SCOTCH TAXES REGULATION BILL.]—Lord H. Petty rose
pursuant to notice, to move for leave to bring in a bill to provide for the payment of the public revenues in Scotland into the banks of that country, for the purpose of being remitted to the bank of England. The principle of the measure had already obtained the sanction of the last parliament by the acts requiring the payment of the public money from the several departments of the excise, customs, post-office, &c. into the bank of England. The same principle would apply in the measure he now proposed, with some circumstances of local distinction, rendered necessary by there being two national banks in Scotland. The collectors of the revenue in that country would be required, by the bill he was about to propose, to make up their accounts on the last day of every month, and to transmit them, with the sums they should have on hand, to the receiver general of the land tax for Scotland, who was to deposit the money, half in the bank of Scotland, and the other half in the royal bank, from which banks it was to be remitted to the bank of England, whenever it should amount to 5000l., there to be kept with the other public monies received from the different departments of the revenue, according to the provisions of the acts of the last parliament. As the Scotch revenue was liable to certain occasional, and sometimes sudden, demands for particular services, provision was to be made for advances for those services, and when the receiver general should certify the occasion to the banks, that certificate would be a warrant to them to issue the money and to make a deduction to that amount from any sum on hand to the remitted to the bank of England. The banks of Scotland were to keep accounts of all monies thus
167
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, March 20.
[MINUTES.] Mr. Bankes
reported from the Glasgow election committee, that Archibald Campbell, esq., the sitting member, was duly elected, and that the petition against his return was not frivolous nor vexatious.—Sir J. Frederick brought up the bill for the construction of a bridge over the Thames opposite Vauxhall, which was read a first time.—Mr. Sheridan brought up a bill for further regulation of the office of treasurer of the navy, which was read a first time.—Mr. C. Dundas, pursuant to notice, moved, that private bills should be allowed to be presented before the printed copies are delivered, but not read a second time before the delivery of printed copies of them to the members. The motion was agreed to and an order made accordingly.—Lord H. Petty brought up a bill for correcting a mistake in the act of last session, for granting annuities to the younger branches of the royal family, which was read a first time.—Sir J. Newport brought up a bill for regulating the commission appointed to inquire into offices and fees in Ireland, which was read a first time.—The defaulters on the preceding day were reported to the house, when the following members, not attending to excuse themselves, were ordered into the custody of the serjeant at arms: sir P. Francis, capt. Freemantle, Mr. H. Joliffe, Mr. W. Keene; Mr. R. Manners, sir C. Morgan, and Mr. R. Thornton. Capt. Free-mantle, sir C. Morgan, and sir P. Francis, were severally taken into custody on coming to the house, and ordered to be discharged out of custody at the rising of the house, first paying their fees.—Ordered, on the motion of lord H. Petty, that the house, at
168
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, March 23.
[SLAVE TRADE, ABOLITION BILL.] The Earl of Westmoreland
presented a petition from certain planters, mortgagees, merchants and others, interested in the West India islands, against a clause added by the house of commons to the Slave Trade Abolition bill, enacting that negroes seized in consequence of illicit trade, should be declared free, which they stated would be productive of great danger to the colonies. Ordered to lie on the table.
Lord Grenville
moved the order of the day for taking into consideration the amendments made by the house of commons in the Slave Trade Abolition bill. His lordship observed that the object of the greater part of these ammendments was to inforce penalties and forfeitures upon those carrying on the trade, after the period fixed by parliament for its abolition, which it was not the practice of that house to enact. These amendments; therefore, were merely calculated the better to carry into effect the principle of the bill. With respect to the amendment in the preamble, leaving out the words, declaring the trade to be contrary to justice, humanity, and sound policy, it would not be imagined after what he had said upon the subject, that his opinion had sustained any alteration. It having, however, been thought right by the house of commons to make this alteration, in order that the feelings of those concerned in the trade might not be wounded, he had no objection to it.
The Bishop of Landaff rose
to deliver his opinion of the bill, which he had not till then an opportunity of doing. The right reverend prelate observed, that in judging of the propriety of the preamble as it originally stood, or of the amendments that had been made in it, the different states of slavery as they existed at different periods of
169
The Earl of Westmoreland
could not let slip this last opportunity of entering his protest against the bill; he must therefore repeat some of his former objections to it, though he was aware that the repetition must in some degree be irksome to the house. At least he must remind them that one More occasion presented itself to allow them to rectify their opinions, which they should be the more induced to do from the awful warning contained in the petition which he had that day laid on their lordship's table. From that petition they might collect the dreadful consequences which even the resolutions of last year were producing in Jamaica. Every thing there seemed to indicate the approach of an organised insurrection, which might receive a new stimulus and encouragement from the bill now on the eve of passing. It, therefore, called again for the most serious consideration of their lordships, and that consideration would
170
The Marquis of Sligo
disapproved of the clauses, and contended, that the preamble contained a gross calumny.
The Duke of Norfolk
was not very anxious on former ocasions to support the measure of the abolition; because he knew that many of those who were loudest in its praise, were far from being sincere in their wishes for its success. Now, however, when it was taken up by ministers who had his confidence, and, who, he was satisfied, were incapable of any duplicity, the bill should have his most cordial support, and he should rejoice to see it pass.—The question was now put on the several amendments, and agreed to.—Lord Grenville then moved, that the bill, with the amendments, &c. as agreed to, be sent to the commons, and on the motion being agreed to,—his lordship again rose, and congratulated the house on having now performed one of the most glorious acts that had ever been done by any assembly of any nation in the world.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, March 23.
[MINUTES.]
A message from the lords, announced their lordships' assent to the mutiny bill, and the sugar drawback.— Mr Whitbread observing that he had on a former evening stated it as his opinion that W. Drake had not received his wound in the battle of Camperdown, declared that a do.
171
172
[CHANGE OF ADMINISTRATION] Lord Euston
presented a petition from the chancellor, masters, and scholars, of the University of Cambridge, taking notice of the bill for enabling his Majesty to avail himself of the services of all his liege subjects in his naval and military forces, in the manner therein mentioned; and setting forth, that the petitioners are anxious to express their serious apprehensions of the danger likely to arise from the said bill if carried into a law, to the established constitution of this country both in church and state, not only because it might eventually,place a dangerous power in the hands of those persons whose tenets are not friendly to our ecclesiastical establishment, but also because the principle of the bill leads to the total abolition of the Test act, and to other still more alarming consequences; and therefore praying, that the said bill may not pass into a law. On his lordship's moving that the petition do lie on the table,
Mr. W. Dickenson rose
not to oppose the motion of the noble lord, but in the fulfilment of his duty as a member of parliament to put a plain and simple question to the noble lord opposite (lord Howick). Twelve or thirteen days ago, that noble lord introduced into the House a bill (against which the petition that had just been presented was directed) enabling his majesty to accept the services of all his liege subjects, of every religious persuasion, in the army and navy. About five days since the noble lord intimated that it was not his intention to carry into execution the order for the second reading of the bill, but to allow it to drop, to be afterwards disposed of as the house might think fit. The noble lord stated, that this intimation was owing to circumstances which it was not then in his power to disclose, but which at some future time he would explicitly narrate. He wished to ask, if that time had arrived? The public mind was in a state of great anxiety. Many rumours were afloat respecting a Change in the Administration: without any wish for such a change having been expres-
173
Lord Howick
replied nearly in the following terms: Sir, certainly no apology was necessary from the hon. gent. for the exercise of one of the first privileges of a member of parliament, that of calling upon his majesty's ministers for explanation upon any great and important subject. In answer to the hon. gent's. questions, I shall declare, as far as I can, consistently with my duty, what is the present state of the administration of this country, adding only, that, with regard to those circumstances which I do not at present feel at liberty to divulge, I shall rely on the candour and indulgence of the house, trusting they will believe that no man is more anxious, than myself that my conduct should stand fair with the house and with the country; and consequently, that the time must come when my duty to the king end to the public, and every consideration of private honour will induce me to make an explicit statement of the recent occurrences. In the mean time, I shall proceed, under the restrictions which I have mentioned, to reply to the questions of the hon. gent. To one of those questions I do not feel authorised at present to give an answer: it is that one which alluded to a rumour, which, if true, would, as the hon. gent. has implied, impute culpability to his majesty's ministers, namely, that his majesty's ministers had endeavoured to force on the king a measure which his conscience disapproved. On this point I will only say, that it is the duty of any minister, on any subject connected with the interests of this great empire. to offer such advice to his majesty as his judgment shall dictate. More I cannot now say. With regard to the other question proposed by the hon. gent., it only remains for me to add to the
174
[CARNATIC PAPERS.] Sir T. Turton
in a speech of considerable length, which be prefaced by observing, that no change of administration could in any measure affect the question now before the house, inveighed strongly against the assumption of the government of the Carnatic, which he repeatedly termed one of the most gross and infamous stretches of tyranny that ever disgraced the annals of India. He dwelt much upon the subsequent treatment of the Polygars, who, he contended, were no more subjects of Britain than of Hesse Cassel He did not charge the lords Clive or Wellesley with the murder of the nabob of Arcot, but insisted that both had been the means of bringing about that murder. The hon. baronet concluded with moving, that there be laid before the house a copy of the instructions given to lord Mornington by the Board of Controul or the Secret Committee, previous to the Treaty respecting the Carnatic in 1792. The hon. baronet said, that beside. one now before the house, he had upon the same subject twelve other motions to submit to the house.
Mr. Tierney
in answer to the hon. baronet's long speech, should briefly observe, that of the papers now called for, one part did not exist, and the other part was already printed.
Sir T. Turton
said, that not being in the office of the right hon. gent., he had not the same means of information, and therefore was not aware of what had been just mentioned. He thought the right hon. gent. answer a fair one, and was willing to withdraw his motion.
Lord A. Hamilton
thought it better that the proper officers be required to lay before the house a copy of all the instructions that had been issued.
Sir A. Wellesley
contended that ,all the instructions which had been transmitted, were already in possession of the house.
175
Col. Symes
asserted that there would not be time in the present session to examine all the papers for which the hon. baronet had moved. Though he had given a long explanation of the object of these motions, yet the explanation was so imperfect, that he could not pretend to understand him. Yet there were one or two observations in his statement which he could not pass over without some notice—Sir T. Turton rose to order, affirming that the hon, gent. ought to confine himself to the particular question before the house.—After a few words from sir J. Anstruther, Mr. Tierney and col. Symes, the motion was agreed to.—The motion for a copy of the Review promised by marquis Wellesley to the Directors was then put and carried, it being understood that there was no such paper, but sir T. Turton wishing to have that fact formerly before the house.
Sir T. Turton
also moved for copies of the official Letters, other than that of the 23d April 1800, respecting the papers discovered at Seringapatam, with the answers so far as not already printed.
Col. Symes
contended that the greatest moderation had been practised in acting on these papers. He denied that the papers had been come by unfairly, or that any improper means had been used to shorten the life of the nabob, who was said not to have died a natural death. He died in consequence of the intemperate use of opium. The governor of Madras sent Dr. Anderson to him when ill, whose report was, that he found him labouring under an incurable dysentery.
Sir T. Turton
would not now enter upon the merits, but he was at issue with the hon. gent. in the whole of his statements. Motion agreed to.—He next moved for a copy of the Paper containing the approbation given of the conduct of lord Clive in the transaction above alluded to, and in the subsequent arrangements with respect to the Prince. Agreed to.—The hon, baronet also moved for copies of the Letters of Omdut Ul Omrah, &c. complaining of grievances. Ordered. He next moved for a copy of a Letter from lord Hobart to Omdut Ul Omrah, complaining of the permission given by him to certain artizans, &c. servants of the company, to settle in his dominions.
Sir J. Anstruther
said, there was no such paper, and that it was not respectful to the house to be moving for papers which it was known did not exist.
Colonel Symes
observed, that gentlemen
176
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, March 24.
[MINUTES.]
A Message from the lords declared their lordship's assent to the amendments made by the house on the Bill for the Abolition of the Slave-trade, with the correction of a clerical error in one of them.—The amendment of the house of lords was agreed to, after a particular explanation from the Speaker, who stated it to be the practice of the house to allow such amendments, when they went only to express more fully, and to further their own intentions, as the amendment in the present case did, going only to supply a clerical omission.—Lord Temple moved that the amendments of the lords in the Sierra Leone Company bill should be taken into consideration. The Speaker felt it his duty to call the attention of the house to the subject of these amendments. This bill, proposing to vest lands in the crown, struck him to be of the same nature of a money bill; and if in the one or the other the lords should introduce any amendments, it appeared to him that, according to the privileges of that house, such amendments were fatal to the bill. He supposed, therefore, that some member of that house would move, that this bill should be laid aside. Lord Temple in conformity with the opinion of the chair, moved that this bill should be thrown out; which was agreed to. The noble lord then moved, that the house should tomorrow resolve into a committee upon the acts relative to the Sierra Leone company, with the view of moving for leave to bring in a bill of the same nature as that which had been just rejected—Mr. Vansittart rose to state, that an hon. gent., (Mr. Osborn Markham) who was a member of the Shrewsbury election committee, having vacated his seat in consequence of his acceptance of a certain appointment, he submitted, for the consideration of the house, how the committee were to act under such an event? The Speaker felt that the right hon. gent. had done right in communicating the information which the house had just heard. But as to the subject of that information it was his duty to state, that a member's vacating his seat in consequence of his acceptance of
177
[LANCASTER ELECTION.] Mr. Dent
called the attention of the house to a circumstance which occurred relative to this election, which greatly involved the privileges of that house. A petition had been presented against him, as one of the sitting members for that town, charging him with bribery and corruption, and loading him with all those epithets which petitions of that description usually contain. It was, however, permitted to drop, but not until he had been put to very considerable trouble and some expence, in preparations to resist it; in doing which he discovered, that five of the persons petitioning against him were not at Lancaster; and he found that there was not the smallest chance of even obtaining that redress which the law of this country gives in cases of forfeited recognizances, as the party so entering into such recognizances on this occasion did not appear to be worth sixpence. He further discovered that warrants, as from the speaker, to attend the committee in town, had been served on several persons, five or six of whom were in attendance then in the lobby, but that all these warrants had been forged; that a person well known to a right hon. gent. opposite (Mr. Tierney) appeared as the solicitor conducting his petition, and the ostensible agent of the petitioners; that the warrants were discovered to be forged, on application at the office of the speaker's secretary; that they were dated the 26th of Feb., whereas none were issued from that depart-
178
The Speaker
suggested the propriety of merely mentioning a future day for taking the matter into consideration, and at present moving, that the offending parties be upon that day ordered to attend.
Mr. Dent
then observed, that to-morrow would equally answer the ends of justice.
Mr. Tierney
did not rise to oppose any enquiry which the house might make upon the business, but merely to say, that he thought to-morrow would be too soon, as it might not be possible for Mr. Alcock, in so short a time, to have an opportunity of justifying himself. He certainly could not, and would not disavow his knowledge of that gentleman, and since he was thus publicly noticed as having such knowledge of him, he would add, that he believed him an upright and honest man.—After some desultory remarks from other members, it was at last ordered, that Mr John Alcock do attend the house to-morrow together with other persons named in the order.
[RESOLUTION RESP CTING OFFICES IN REVERSION.] Mr. Bankes
said he was not aware that the motion he was about to offer was liable to any objection. It came recommended, not by his individual authority, but by the sanction of the committee of the house appointed "to examine and consider what regulations and checks have been established, in order to controul the several branches of the public expenditure in Great Britain and Ireland, and how far the same have been effectual, and what further measures can be adopted for reducing any part of the said expenditure, or diminishing the amount of salaries end emoluments without detriment to the public service" It occurred to the committee, in furtherance of the object committed to its care, that grants of offices in reversion, though not exceeding the grants that had been made in former times, ought to be restricted, and put a stop to. In Ireland, which had lately become united with this country, and was equally entitled to attention, the practice of granting reversions prevailed to an infinitely greater extent. The practice was an abuse, so far as it prevailed, and it was an abuse likely to be extended, if some timely check was not imposed upon it. He was therefore
179
Mr. Yorke
gave every possible credit to the motives of his hon. friend and of the committee, and yet he felt a good deal of difficulty in assenting to this motion. The doubt in his mind was, whether the ancient and accustomed practice ought to be altered, when, as stated by his hon. friend himself, it had of late been but little abused. It was a favourite maxim with him, not to change established usages unless he saw some strong reason for it. This granting of offices in reversion had been a power in the hands of the crown for the purpose of rewarding services; and hitherto it had in fact been a saving to the public; for unless these offices could be given in this manner, services, if they were rewarded at all, must be rewarded by a grant, and a double burthen would thus be laid upon the public. The object of this motion, as had been stated, was undoubtedly of the greatest importance; and yet the house was called upon to decide upon it at once. The notice had only been given the preceding day, and given in such a manner that till he came down that day, he did not exactly know the purport of it. He hoped therefore that the house would at least take more time to consider of it. If the motion had been for leave to bring in a bill, he should have had no objection to it, because he could then have stated his objections in the different stages, provided he thought it was liable to objection. But as the motion was for a resolution, he was inclined to dissent from it; for even though it should be followed by a bill, those arguing against that bill would be under an evident disadvantage when such a resolution as this stood on the journals. He hoped therefore the motion would be postponed, if not, he should be under the necessity of giving it his negative.
Lord Howick
gave his most cordial support to the motion. He saw nothing in the arguments of the rt. hon. gent. who spoke last, to induce him to think it ought to be postponed. The notice given yesterday in one of the fullest houses of the session, and particularly marked by his (lord H.'s) saying he would support the motion, and adding, what he repeated now, that not one single reversion had been given away by the present administration, though some very valuable ones had fallen in, was, in his opi-
180
181
Mr. Plumer (of Hertford) rose
and said: I wish, sir, that this measure had been brought forward 40 years ago. This has been hitherto my sincere desire; and I, therefore, give the motion now made my most hearty assent. Having said thus much upon the measure itself, I cannot help embracing this opportunity of paying a tribute of applause to the present administration (I say present, upon the supposition that they are still in office), as I really think they have shewn every disposition to benefit the country by their judicious measures, and their avoiding the practice of former administrations, of granting reversions. Upon this occasion, too, I have another observation to make, which is this: in coming down to the house this day, I have heard a report, which I am very sorry to hear; I have heard, sir, that the new government which is now forming, or to be formed, have agreed to give to an hon. and learned member of this house (alluding to Mr. Perceval, who was not then in the house) an appointment to the Duchy of Lancaster for life, in order to tempt that gentleman to take a place in the new government. Upon this, I may observe, that if men of great abilities are not satisfied with the rewards attached to the situations which his majesty chooses to appoint them to hold in the government of their country, if they do not think the usual compensation sufficient, they ought not to accept of office at all. I do, however, at all events, enter my protest most solemnly against the measure of giving a man a situation for life, in order to entice him to occupy another, which may be more fleeting and temporary. (Loud cries of hear! hear!)
Sir John Newport
wished this resolution had been adopted a year sooner. The house would not taken be in the situation in which it now was, with respect to some of the Irish offices which had been reported as proper, some to be abolished, and some to be reformed, and which could not be touched in either way, on account of the interests of the reversioners. The office of customer and
182
Mr. Johnstone
approved of the motion, which was perfectly consistent with the principles on which his hon. friend (Mr. Bankes) had always acted, and he thought it was a happy omen of what might be expected from the exertions of the committee of which he was chairman. He could not, however, think a mere unauthenticated rumour a sufficient justification for what had been said of an hon. and learned gent. not now present, the whole tenor of whose life had shewn his preference of public principle to private advantage. He could not help observing too, that those who had been most clamorous in cheering the reflections cast on the hon. and learned gentlemen, were members of a family which was loaded with wealth derived from public sinecures. He wished, with the hon. gent. on the floor, that the resolution now before the house had been adopted 40 years ago, and then that family would not now be drawing £60,000 a year from the labour of the public. But however eager they had hitherto been for places and pensions, he was glad that at last they had found it expedient to change their tone.
Mr. Plumer
in explanation, allowed that the mere rumour of the day was not a sufficient ground for calling the attention of the house to any thing: but after the allusion made by the noble lord opposite, he thought himself justified in the observations he had offered. As to the rest of what had fallen from the hon. gent. it did not touch him, He was not one of the family which was loaded with wealth derived from the public. If the report was unfounded, what he had said could do no harm: if the report was true, what he had said might do much good.
Lord Henry Petty
though he approved of the present motion, rose not so much for the purpose of expressing that approbation, as with a view to apologize to the house for not having brought forward the subject himself. He entertained the same opinion with the committee some time ago, and intended to have made a similar motion, and for that purpose had moved for an account of the offices granted in reversion, which was now
183
Mr. Henry Martin
(of Kinsale)
said, he so fully coincided in the propriety of the resolution now before the house, and felt it so necessary to counteract a system so mischievous as that which had been alluded to this night, that he should now give notice, that he would to-morrow move an humble address to his majesty, praying, that he would be graciously pleased not to grant any place in the duchy of Lancaster, or elsewhere, for life, which had hitherto been usually held by the possessors during his majesty's pleasure. (Hear! hear! from all parts of the house.)
General Gascoyne
disapproved of the bringing forward this resolution at present; because he thought it looked very suspicious, and had the appearance of being intended to restrict the new government. In the absence of all those, who, according to report, were to have a share in that government, it was not proper to press it. No notice had been given of it, that must necessarily have reached them. At all events, though it should pass at present, that must not be considered as a pledge to support the bill.
Mr. Horner
as a member of the committee, felt himself called upon to say a few words on the present occasion. As the hon. general had insinuated that this motion had
184
General Gascoyne
in explanation, disclaimed any intention to throw any imputation whatever upon the committee. He had only said, that the manner in which the resolution had been brought forward and argued, excited in his mind a suspicion that it was intended as a restriction on the new arrangement.
Mr. Sheridan
observed that the hon. general certainly had not thrown, by his speech, any censure upon the measure now proposed; but he had thrown a very severe imputation upon his friends in the new administration; and one for which he believed at least, they would be very little obliged to the zeal of the hon. general. For his own part, though the new ministers were about to occupy those places from which himself and his colleagues must shortly retreat, yet he had so little of political animosity towards them, that he was unwilling to impute to them any such intentions as those which the zeal of the hon. general this night bespoke. He hoped they were actuated by stronger motives for accession to power, than those of bargaining and buying their way into office. The hon. general's reasonings amounted to this: "if you attempt to carry a resolution of this sort, you will throw the strongest impediment in the way of forming a new and virtuous administration, to succeed the wicked and corrupt one just turned out of office: you will paralize the vigour of their exertions: you will cripple the magnitude of their plans, if you prevent them from taking, or granting lucrative places in reversion, or for life, in addition to those they are to hold during the king's pleasure, in remuneration for their great services and splendid talents." This, however, was a doctrine to which he could not subscribe, and a kind of support from the hon. general, which
185
Mr. Huskisson
was sure that the character and principles of his hon. friend, who had brought forward the resolution, would secure him from the imputation of having been actuated by party motives. From what he had learned in conversation with other members of the committee, he was persuaded that they were all agreed that no places should be granted henceforth in reversion. As to the propriety of any arrangements with a view to induce individuals to accept of office, he believed that the first measure of the administration then in office, with a view to enable a noble lord (Grenville), for whom he felt a very sincere respect, was a sufficient proof that such an arrangement was not very extraordinary. As to the new administration, he knew nothing more of it, than he was enabled to collect from the rumours afloat, and he did not believe that any arrangement had been yet submitted for the approbation of the highest authority in the state.
Mr. Whitbread
observed, that without giving any opinion upon the merits of the case referred to by the hon. gent. (Mr. Johnstone), he had no hesitation in asserting that there was a material difference between that case and the one more particularly alluded to, in the course of this debate. For in the one, the object was to enable a man to hold an office which was conferred upon him for life, in conjunction with one to which he was appointed during pleasure, and for that purpose the sanction of parliament was applied for, and obtained; while in the other the proposition was, that an office
186
Mr. Huskisson
in explanation stated, that he did not mean to assert a complete analogy between the case of the noble lord alluded to (lord Grenville) and that which appeared to be so much in view in the present discussion. Probably he merely meant to infer from the former case, that in the contemplation of ministerial arrangements, the nature of an office might be changed by connecting it with one with which it was previously deemed altogether incompatible. To be sure in one case the change could be effected only by the sanction of parliament, whereas in the other it was quite subject to the will of the king.
Mr. Parnell
thought that it behoved the house to take peculiar care upon a question of this nature. For, understanding that a
187
Mr. Johnstone
disclaimed any intention to assert any thing so absurd, as that the holding of a public place of profit was incompatible with the purity of public character. He only meant to say, that it afforded him great satisfaction to hear a motion of this nature so loudly applauded by men who were themselves loaded with so much of the public money. It was a good omen, and he hoped it would not prove delusive.—The resolution was then agreed to, and Mr. Bankes, Mr. Horner, and Mr. S. Bourne, were appointed to prepare and bring in a bill pursuant thereto.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, March 25.
[MINUTES.]
—The royal assent was given by commission to the Slave Trade Abolition bill, the Irish Licence bill, and the Thames Police bill, and two private bills.—Lord Grenville (who sat with his friends on the opposition side of the house), gave notice, that to-morrow, on the motion of adjournment for the recess, he should state such explanations as he deemed consistent with his duty to his country and to himself, respecting the circumstances which had led to the present situation of public affairs, and of the country.
[SCOTCH JUDICATURE BILL.]—Lord Grenville
moved the order of the day for a committee on the Scotch Judicature bill,—
188
Lord Eldon
moved for the appointment of a committee to inquire where the judges of the court of session should be placed during their attendance on the house, and to search for precedents, &c. His reason for moving this was, that
189
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, March 25.
[MINUTES.]—Lord G. Cavendish
reported from the Lanark committee, that the sitting member, sir Charles Ross, was duly elected; and that the petition was not frivolous nor vexatious.—Mr. Long moved, that a new writ should be issued for a member for the borough of Plympton, in the room of lord Castlereagh, who had accepted the office of one of his majesty's principal secretaries of state; and also, for the borough of Newton, in the room of Mr. Canning, who had accepted the office of one of the principal secretaries of state. Ordered.—Lord Howick adverted to the promise which he had given of an explanation with respect to the change of administration. To-morrow there would be a motion for an adjournment for some days, and he was unwilling that the house should separate without the explanation being given. He therefore gave notice that he would give that explanation the next day.—Sir S. Romilly, pursuant to notice, moved for leave to bring in a bill to render the Freehold Estates of traders liable to the Bankrupt laws dying indebted assets for the payment of their simple contract debts. As there seemed a general concurrence that a bill of this nature would be unobjectionable, he need not enter upon the grounds of the motion. He was sorry that the other bill bad been lost; but since he could not do all the good he wished, he most at least endeavour to do all the good he could. The motion was then put and carried.
[IRISH BUDGET.]
—The house resolved itself into a committee of Ways and Means.
Sir John Newport
conscious how little claim he had to occupy the attention of the house at any time, but much less at the present, said he should endeavour to make his statements as briefly as possible; nor should he have to trouble the committee on the subject, if it had not been for the circumstance of his having so great a share in negociating the Loan last Monday for Ireland. The hon. baronet then briefly stated the different items of the Supplies for Ireland, composed of its separate charges, and its two-seven-teenth parts of the joint charge of the empire, which made the whole charge amount to £9,561,218. Part of the loan for Ireland had been contracted for with the English
190
s
d
The new Taxes and Regulations were to
produce, by excess of the Duty on Li-
censed Distilleries, arising out of the Re-
gulations adopted tact year, over the
amount of the antecedent year
£120,000
Taking the Allowance of 16 per cent. from
large Distilleries
80,000
Augmentation on Duties on Horses, Carts,
and Jaunting Cars
40,000
Paper
5,000
Stamps
10,000
Stamps to Retailers
5,000
Excess of Duty on Hats
10,000
An Augmentation on the Duties of Cus-
toms upon Vinegar, Dye-Stuffs, and a
few other articles
10,000
Together with other Items, amounting to
20,000
—
Making altogether
£300,000
191
The value of the Imports for 1805, was
£5,982,000
Ditto for 1806
5,605,000
—
Being a decrease of
377,000
—
The Exports for 1805
8,436,933
Ditto for 1806
9,314,800
—
Being an increase of
£877,867
[AFFAIRS OF INDIA.]—Sir Philip Francis
wished to call the attention of the house to a subject of the greatest importance, and for that purpose rose to ask some questions of the president of the board of controul, or of the person who had lately filled that situation. On the subject to which he alluded, he could speak, perhaps, with more knowledge than any Who had heard him. It related to the state of India. He was not so vain nor so ill instructed by experience, as to imagine that any thing he could say would make any very strong impression on the house, or rouse them to give a more than ordinary attention to the subject which it was his object to press upon
192
193
Mr. Huskisson
spoke to order. He apprehended that it was irregular to go into a long statement when a member rose merely to ask a question.
The Speaker
agreed that it was irregular.
Sir P. Francis
had no other intention than merely to justify his asking those questions, and, as he had done this, he would trespass on the attention of the house no further.
Mr. Tierney
rose to give such answers as he could to the questions of his hon. friend. To the question, why no account relative to the finances of India had been laid before the house, the answer was that none could be laid, as they had not as yet arrived. One year's accounts might, indeed, have been made out, and it was his intention to have brought forward these, as might be recollected from the notice he had given. But when he found that he was immediately to have a Successor, and that, in fact, for some days past, he only held the office as a
locum tenens
194
[MOTION RESPECTING THE OFFICE OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER, &C——Mr. Henry Martin
rose, pursuant to notice, to submit his motion to the house; and he had to regret that this task had not fallen into abler hands. He felt that he had little claim to the consideration of the house, and trusted that some gentleman of greater talents would come forward to support the question which he looked upon it as his duty to bring under the consideration of the house. But before he should enter into the grounds of his motion, or of the propriety of bringing it forward, he wished to clear away every suspicion that he was actuated by any motives of hostility towards the right hon. and learned gent. (Mr. Perceval) who was the object of it. With that gentleman he had the pleasure and the honour of being long acquainted, and he entertained the highest respect for his abilities and character. Much as he was attached to the honourable persons who composed his majesty's late administration, he could assure the house, that in bringing forward this motion, he was actuated by no party motive. He wished also to shew, that in doing this, he was not doing any thing that would trench upon the prerogative of the crown. From the year 1660 to the present time, there appeared but two instances in which the office of chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, to which his motion particularly applied, had been granted for life. The result of the inquiry, which he had been able to make upon so short a notice was, that it had not in any other instance been granted for life within that period of 147 years. This would satisfy the
195
196
197
The Hon. J. W. Ward
rose to second the motion, to which he gave his full and cordial approbation. The motion for the address to his majesty was recommended to the house by every principle of reason, and all the authority of precedent. The precedents shewed incontestibly that the motion would not interfere with the royal prerogative, and the reason of the thing was so obvious, as not to require illustration. Every grant of a place for life had a direct tendency to impair the dignity of the crown. Any other measure might be condemned upon certain particular grounds, but this was a proceeding which was to be resisted upon every consideration of reason, policy, and interest. The practice, if permitted, would impair the dignity and means of the crown. It would abridge the exercise of the power of punishing weak, wicked, or corrupt ministers, by depriving them of their offices, and take away from the crown the power of bestowing those offices on wise and virtuous ministers; it would remove all
locus penitentiœ
Mr. Perceval
had felt so anxious to be
198
199
200
Mr. Plumer
rose merely to vindicate himself from the charge that, was yesterday brought against him, of making a statement in that house on the mere authority of an idle rumour. It appeared now, from what had fallen from the right hon. and learned gent. that his statement had been perfectly correct, and that if it had not been for the notice taken of it last night in the house, the business would have gone too far to remedy it, and the right hon. gent. would have now been in the possession of the two, places. He did not pretend to deny the merit of the right hon. gent., or mean any thing personal against him, but he had a great objection to the principle of giving a great place for life, merely as an inducement to a person to accept of an office in the service of the country, the emoluments of which had hitherto been considered a sufficient compensation.
Lord Henry Petty
said, that if he had not been so personally alluded to by the right hon. and learned gent. he did not think he should have troubled the house with any observations upon the present question. He was ready to join perfectly with the hon.
201
202
203
Mr. Sturges Bourne
could not help expressing his surprise at the manner in which this motion was supported, and his astonishment at the hon. and learned quarter whence it originated. When he recollected that the hon. and learned gent. who brought forward the motion was acquainted with the talents, integrity, and disinterestedness of his right hon. friend—(Here there was a continued cry of hear! hear! mixed with laughter)—A more honourable, a more liberal, a more independent, and a more disinterested character never existed—(hear! hear!)—He would go farther, and say, that if his right hon. and learned friend accepted of both places, he would make a large sacrifice by abandoning his professional pursuits in return. He should like to know, then, whence arose the surprise of hon. gentlemen opposite, when the word disinterestedness was mentioned? It could be from personal motives only. He was surprised that the noble lord who had lately left his majesty's councils, should throw any embarrassment in the way of the new administration, when that embarrassment tended to impede the usual exercise of the prerogative of the crown. The value of the chancellorship of the duchy of Lancaster did not exceed 2000
l
204
Mr. Sharpe
said, that if he were to judge from the specimen just given to the house, he should not expect that the new administration would be good at making convincing speeches. He could not help seriously expressing his surprise at the assertion of the hon gent. who spoke last, that there was no difference between the present case and that of lord Ashburton. It was painful to him to enter into any personal comparison, bat he hoped the house would acquit him of any invidious motive. Mr. Dunning was indisputably at the head of his profession. He was shut out from the great emoluments of such a situation, by being advanced to the upper house. As to the right hon. gent. in question; the least he could say, was that that right hon. gent. certainly was not at the head of his profession. He (Mr. Sharpe) had repeatedly in the course of not a very short life, discharged the duties of a juror, and yet it had been his great misfortune never once to have had his understanding enlightened by the professional exertions of the right hon. gent. He would go farther, for the truth was, that the abilities of the right hon. gent. were not known until he had got into an official situation. It might be asked, why did he enter into this unpleasant comparison? because it was of importance to that house and to the country, to know what was the real extent of the pro
205
Mr. Montague rose
to contradict, substantially and directly, the statement made by the hon. gentleman who had just sat down, as far as that statement related to the professional eminence of his right hon. friend. The hon. mover knew well that eminence; and he contended that his right hon. friend must lose considerably by his present appointment, that is, he would give up more than he would receive. He contended, upon the word of a gentleman, that such was the fact. His right hon. friend had made even a greater sacrifice; he had given up the post of attorney general, to which he had an undisputed claim. Was he to receive no equivalent for the loss of eight or ten thousand pounds a year? Gentlemen might laugh, but he was anxious to convince fair men only; he was anxious that his arguments should weigh with fair men only, and he was free to say that gentlemen on the opposite side were not fair, nor disposed to be so (a general cry of order! order!)
Lord Howick
spoke to order. It was extremely irregular to impute unfairness to any member.
Mr. Montague
in continuation, said, that he was willing to make every apology; he begged pardon of the house for any temporary inadvertence; he could assure them that it was not intentional. He begged of the house to consider the case of his right hon. friend, obliged to turn his back on his profession, with a numerous family and absolute distress before him, if he was not to be recompensed: besides that, it would be peculiarly distressing, as affecting the arrangements making by his majesty, arrangements rendered necessary by the dereliction of those very men (here several gentlemen rose to order!)
The
Speaker
206
Lord Howick
did not think the hon gent. when he was interrupted actually out of order, but he much feared, that the hon. member, had he not been then interrupted, was hurrying into that which would have called for serious animadversion.
Mr. Montague
in continuation, said, that if a member did not intend to be disorderly, whatever expressions might have fallen from him, that member was not to be put down by clamour. He addressed himself to the independent members of that house, and to their attention did he particularly address himself (another cry of order, order! chair, chair!).
The Speaker
wished the honourable member to recollect, that in the language of that house no such distinction between its members was recognised.
Mr. Montague
in continuation, again apologised, stating, that the distinction he meant was between those seeking for places and pensions, and those who were not candidates for either. He himself was one of the latter, for he never had nor never would solicit a place, though he had been so long in habits of the strictest intimacy with a great and leading statesman. He should conclude with stating, that had it not been for the unseasonable interruptions he had met with, he should not have been upon his legs so long.
Mr. Henry Thornton
said he could not give his vote on this occasion without requesting to be indulged in a few words to qualify it. No man entertained a higher opinion of the right honourable gentleman, who was the subject of the present debate, than he did; and therefore, in supporting the present question, he wished to be considered more as giving a declaratory vote upon general principles, than as intending any opposition to the arrangement made; he voted merely upon a dry abstract principle, and not at all from party motives. It was his opinion that places usually held under the crown during pleasure ought not to be granted for life. Whether, as a member of the Committee of Finance, and having breathed so long the air of that committee, he came down to the house now to give his vote with
207
Mr. Johnstone
said, he should not have risen to trouble the house, but for the purpose of making an observation, in answer to some allusions made to him by an honourable member who spoke early in the debate (Mr. Plumer), in respect to what he had said last night. The honourable member, it was true, had last night stated, what turned out to be founded in fact, as proved by the declaration of a right honourable gentleman this evening (Mr. Perceval), but When he did state the circumstance, he avowed no other ground than rumour, unsupported by any authentic reference. Adverting to the comparisons which had been made by gentlemen on the other side of the house, between the case now under consideration, and those of lord Ashburton and lord Lechmere, he thought there was very little difference. But he could not refrain from some observations upon the conduct of those honourable gentlemen themselves, when they were taking credit for so much purity and disinterestedness. He would ask, how they could reconcile with those assumptions, the indecency of pressing upon that house on their first accession to office, and at nine o'clock at night, two successive stages of a bill for enabling the noble lord at the head of the late administration (lord Grenville) to hold as a sinecure the office of Auditor of the Exchequer, with large emoluments annexed, and the duties of which were to be done by another; and this at the same time that another noble lord at the head of the family enjoyed the Tellership of the Exchequer with emoluments almost incalculable? How could they reconcile with this boasted purity the extraordinary increase made in the salary of First Lord of the Admiralty, lately enjoyed by another branch of that noble family, and this not avowed to parliament in an open manly way, but effected by a secret fund? How could that right honourable gentleman reconcile to his purity the calling on the house for 3000
l
208
Mr. Sheridan
said, that it was not the first time he had observed in the honourable gentleman who had just sat down an eagerness to attack the late administration and its friends, though certainly the present, like every former attempt, evinced rather an avidity to attack than a power to be offensive, He was glad, however, to see in the present attack something like a philosophical neutrality, and that as the late administration had had the misfortune of the honourable gentleman's opposition, so the present would be now likely to come in for its due share. The honourable gentleman had said a great deal about independence, and had congratulated himself in an angry tone upon his having no place under any government. He (Mr. Sheridan) could only say, that he was no divulger of private secrets; but he might make some allusion to a certain public message, which he had been deputed to deliver to a right honourable friend, now no more (Mr. Fox) at the formation of the late administration. He was sure the honourable gentleman perfectly understood him (a general laugh). He was rather inclined to believe, from the nature of that message, that the honourable gentleman, notwithstanding his present acrimony, might then have been completely dulcified
209
210
211
l
l
212
Mr. Johnstone
in explanation, stated that he neither had nor would have applied to the right honourable gentleman who had just sat down for the purpose of procuring him any appointment upon the occasion alluded to, and for two reasons, the first, that he knew, if he had applied, the right honourable gentleman was too much engaged in providing for himself and his family, to attend to any agency for others; and secondly, because if he had requested the right honourable gentleman to undertake the commission, he was pretty sure that, although he might promise, he would have been very apt to forget it. Now the fact was, upon the case referred to by the right honourable gentleman, simply no more than this. After stating to the right honourable gentleman the substance
213
Mr. Sheridan
in explanation, expressed an unwillingness to fix any imputation on the honourable gentleman. As some persons wished for emoluments, so others wished for honour or patronage. It was not for him to say, of what description the honourable gentleman's ambition was. With respect to the charge of his (Mr. Sheridan) being busy in providing for himself and his family, the fact was, that his right hon. friend, who was now unhappily no more(Mr. Fox), thought, that after a service, he hoped not unmeritorious, of twenty-seven years in parliament, some provision for life ought to be made for him. It had happened rather singularly, that his right honourable friend had intimated, that the office that had been so much spoken of that night, the chancellorship of the duchy of Lancaster, should be appropriated to that provision; but, on consulting with his colleagues, his right honourable friend found that trey had formed a determination not to grant for life this office, or any other, usually held during pleasure. On being informed of this determination, he entreated his right honourable friend by no means to press the matter, and thus he remained without a provision for life, and this office was reserved for the disposal of the new ministers.
Mr. Simeon
thought the right of granting the office in question for life ought not to be much exercised. He thought it wrong, however, to adopt a general restriction with a view to a particular case. He regretted that the question should now be brought forward to prevent the formation of a new administration. He wished the late administration to have remained in place. But the new administration were better than none, and therefore he was unwilling to see its formation impeded. If the crown had the power
214
Mr. Fuller
said, he should be always forward to support the just exercise of his majesty's prerogative; but he confessed that he must disapprove of the manner in which it was understood that this prerogative was now about to be applied, and therefore he would support this motion. For the sake of the king's own interest he would support this motion; because he did not like the idea of his majesty's giving away places for life. On the contrary, he would advise him to keep such places subject to his disposal, for those men who served him. He would recommend to the king to keep the key of the oat-chest himself, and not give it to others; for he might rely upon it, that if he did not retain the power of serving those men, they would not serve him. It would be much better for his majesty that all places for life were converted into places during pleasure than to allow any increase of the former. This he said with a view to the king's own interest; for he regarded his majesty much, for his firm attachment to the constitution. He declared, that in his opinion the names of George the Third, Nelson, and William Pitt, ought to be engraven on the hearts of all Englishmen, for the noble services they had rendered to their country; for having in fact been the saviours of our glorious constitution. As to the right honourable gentleman to whom this motion was understood particularly to refer, he declared that he could see no reasonable objection to him, compared with those who preceded him in the office to which he was said to be appointed, especially when he considered how young the man was who held that office in the late administration.
Mr. Wilberforce
had the honour, he said, to have been very long acquainted with the principles and character of the right honourable gentleman to whom this motion was understood more immediately to refer, and he sincerely believed him a man of the highest disinterestedness and public spirit. With this impression strongly upon his mind, his opinion must be, that that right honourable gentleman himself would have come forward to render this debate unnecessary, if it were not that, from the manner in which a notice of the motion had been given, the remarks which had been made the preceding night, and other circumstances, such a proceeding might ap
215
The Master of the Rolls
having had no opportunity of inquiring fully into the merits of the general proposition which this motion involved, could not think himself justified in voting for its adoption. There were, in his opinion, a variety of topics, which ought to be fully investigated before such a motion was acceded to. There were many places held for life which ought to be converted into places during pleasure, and,
vice versa
216
Lord Howick
denied the right hon. and learned gentleman's assertion, that this motion went to impose any improper restraint upon the royal prerogative, or that it could in any degree be considered an innovation or invasion of that prerogative. For, in point of fact, what did it propose? Why, nothing more than this, that a place should not be granted for life, which had been heretofore held only during pleasure. He was not at present disposed to enter into a discussion as to the extent of the king's prerogative; but this he had no difficulty in saying, that this prerogative did not authorise the grant of places for life, which had been heretofore held during pleasure. This motion, therefore, only proposed to advise his majesty not to do that which according to law he was not warranted in doing. The conduct towards the judges in the reign of William the Third, had no reference whatever to the case now under consideration. If, indeed, the crown could grant places of this nature for life, why not by and by grant the chancellorship of the exchequer itself, or the lord chancellorship for life? A case of the latter having been so appointed had no, doubt occurred in the person of Wolsey. But, what were the remarks of lord Coke upon that subject? Why, that the principle of such an appointment was utterly objectionable, that it was not legal to grant those places for life which it had been heretofore usual to hold during pleasure. Such, then, was the object of this motion. It proposed only to declare the law to the crown, in order that no deviation from it should take place. With regard to the precedents referred to in the course of the debate, he had not had time to look into all the proceedings upon them; but in the case of lord Ashburton, he believed that the propriety of the grant made to that noble lord was at that time much disputed, and, in his opinion, very justly. For, much as he respected the merits of that great man, he certainly should not have voted for such a measure, as he could not think it was a legal grant. To the memory and character of the marquis of Rockingham, although he was too young to have had the happiness of any acquaintance with him, no one could
217
218
219
Mr. Sturges Bourne
in explanation, said, he had expressed some surprise that the noble lord should think of bringing forward his explanation in the absence of those who alone could know on that side of the house, the circumstances to which the noble lord would have to advert. The noble lord would not suppose, surely, that he had any thing to do with the publication alluded to by the noble lord. He assured him he knew nothing of it.
General Graham
supported the motion. He had for many years acted with Mr. Pitt, and generally of course with the gentlemen on the other side, particularly during the last parliament, when such proceedings had taken place against a noble viscount, to whom he had the honour to be related (lord Melville,) as were by their violence and injustice a disgrace to the Journals of the house. He regretted sincerely the dismissal of the late administration, and particularly as they were succeeded by men who from their conduct in abandoning the government on the death of Mr. Pitt, from acknowledged incapacity to conduct it, left that on record which furnished an evidence of their present presumption.—The question being then loudly called for, a division took place: when there appeared for the address 208; against it 115; majority
220
[MR. PALMER'S PETITION.]
A petition of John Palmer Esq. of the city of Bath was brought up, and read; setting forth, "that the petitioner having, in common with other subjects of this kingdom experienced great inconvenience from the tedious, irregular, and insecure mode of correspondence by the General Post, and having had frequent occasions to remark great defects in the establishments of the Post Office, which had become a matter of universal complaint, he was induced to give much serious consideration to a grievance of such magnitude, and was ultimately convinced that improvements might be made so as not only to effect a more speedy, regular, and secure conveyance for letters throughout the Kingdom, but likewise be the means of providing the same advantages for property and travellers, and at the same time of creating and supporting a gradual, and ultimately a very considerable, increase to the revenue, derivable from the Post Office, which, instead of keeping pace with the increasing commerce and opulence of the country, had (in consequence of the defects before alluded to) been long in a state of stagnation, if not of actual decrease; and that in the spring of 1782, the petitioner having arranged the general outline of his proposed reform, and connected with it such an increased rate of postage, with a restriction on franking, as appeared adviseable at the commencement, he communicated the same to the right ho
221
222
223
224
s
225
226
227
228
229
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, March 26.
[COMMERCE OF THE COUNTRY]. Lord Auckland
called the attention of the house to a practice, which, from a sense of duty, he had so often pursued, in bringing forward, for the information of parliament, such annual accounts as were connected with any office that he had happened to fill. He was more especially induced to this, as he had resigned a few days ago the presidency of the committee of council for trade, an office of great importance and responsibility, which no prudent man would undertake or hold, unless he felt that he could have the confidence and co-operation of a strong and enlightened government. He was proud to believe that he had possessed the unreserved confidence of a government entitled to those epithets. The efficient offices of that government had been filled
230
For the year 1804
£22,016,000
—— —— 1805
23,130,000
—— —— 1806
24,358,000
For year ending Jan. 5, 1805
£23,935,000
—— —— 1806
25,004,000
—— —— 1807
27,403,000
l
231
The Earl of Westmoreland
said, he did not rise to controvert the statements of the noble lord, but merely to observe, that the grounds of such a statement proved the administration of which the noble lord formed a part, did not succeed to the government of a ruined country, or to dilapidated resources.— The question on the noble lord's motion was put, and the accounts ordered accordingly.
[CHANGE OF ADMINISTRATION.] Lord Hawkesbury
moved, that the house at its rising do adjourn to Wednesday sen night.
Lord Grenville
immediately rose, and
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
for his decision
243
244
Lord Sidmouth
expressed his regret that
245
246
247
Lord Hawkesbury
said, he had never heard the noble viscount with more real satisfaction, than during the speech which he had just finished, because he perceived that his noble friend had not abandoned those principles upon which they had formerly acted. When this measure had been brought forward, he felt considerable satisfaction that his noble friend was a member of administration, because he was convinced that the country had in him in the cabinet a security against the attempt to break down the church establishment. He was fully sensible of the delicacy of the question before the house; he felt the delicacy of the discussion when a question was at issue between a subject and his sovereign. It was not for him to decide whether or not this discussion could have been avoided. Much had been said by the noble baron and the noble viscount of the publications that had taken place on this subject. Of these he knew nothing, and felt as much regret as any person that such statements should have found their way to the public. But he must observe, that previous to his having any knowledge of the transaction, there had been many rumours in circulation, directly contrary to the fact, and proved to be so by the statement of the noble baron himself, which had proceeded, no doubt, from individuals not connected with his majesty's government. Under these circumstances, he had thought it his duty to request the permission of his sovereign, after notice of the noble baron's intention had been given, to communicate the Whole circumstances of the case to his friends, in order, that if this discussion should unfortunately come on, they might be prepared to meet it, and to state on the part of his majesty, what were those principles, both with regard to the honour of the crown and the interests of the empire, that had induced him to adopt the course which he had taken. The catholic subject was not a new one. It had, often been under consideration, and had, about two years since, after the most ample discussion in both houses of parliament, been decided upon by the largest majorities ever known, considering the character and talents of the persons who had brought it forward. The noble baron had stated What would be the
248
249
250
251
252
Lord Moira
was adverse to the idea of being at issue with his sovereign, but a correct explanation of the transaction was rendered peculiarly necessary on account of the false and scandalous view of it which had been published by persons who must have had access to the minutes of the privy council, of which garbled extracts had been given in order to mislead the public. His noble friend had given that explanation with all that precision, justness, and delicacy, that might naturally have been expected from him. The noble secretary had laboured hard to prove that there had been a misconception on this point. This had not peen denied; but he had not touched on the pledges that had been required, and which
253
254
Lord Melville
expressed his satisfaction that the discussion had been entered into, and he wished that every person from one end of the island to the other, should be informed of the true state of the question. An illustrious person, now no more (Mr. Pitt), had been alluded to; he joined from the very bottom of his heart in all the praises which had been bestowed on him; and so ardent was his attachment to the opinions of that great man, that he wished to make them the polar star of his life. He would now advert to a part of the conduct of that eminent character. When that distinguished man retired from office in 1800, he had an opinion, that the passing of the catholic question was indispensable. But, on weighing that question more maturely in retirement, and coupling it with the consideration of the honourable, unalterable, and conscientious repugnance of his sovereign, he altered that opinion, and determined never again to press his sovereign on a question, to which he was so conscientiously and invincibly averse. This determination was formed long before Mr. Pitt returned to office, and was communicated to his majesty long before that period, accompanied with Mr. Pitt's assurance to adhere to it equally, whether he should be in or out of office. On this principle Mr. Pitt came into office in 1804. He would ask the noble baron who had opened this
255
256
Lord Grenville
in answer to the question of the noble viscount, whether he had reserved to himself his own opinion, upon the subject of the Catholics, to act upon it, notwithstanding what he knew to be the opinion of his majesty upon that subject; answered, that he told Mr. Pitt, when solicited by him to take part in the administration before the last, that no consideration under Heaven should induce him to go into the service of the king, although he would join Mr. Pitt as soon as he would any other man —that no consideration under Heaven should induce him to take part in any government upon earth, without reserving his own opinion upon this subject.
Lord Holland
thought it unnecessary now to discuss either the bill lately before the other house, or the Catholic question; the real question was, the cause for the dismissal of his majesty's late ministers, and the situation in which his majesty's present ministers were placed on the catholic question. He was ready at any time to vindicate the conduct and the principles of himself and his
257
258
The Earl of
Carnarvan
Lord Hawkesbury
explained, by denying that the present ministers had bound themselves by any such pledge: he said, if his majesty's late ministers thought their own opinions right, they did right to support them; and if they found those opinions positively resisted by his majesty, it was their duty to resign their situations.
The Earl of Buckinghamshire rose
to explain the principles that were in the contemplation of government, in 1801, respecting any further concessions to the catholics; which, he said, were nothing more than to pass a bill in the English parliament, adopting the same principle as the bill passed by the Irish parliament, for throwing open the subordinate ranks of the army, under that of staff officers, to catholics: and without which the Irish bill would have no operation out of Ireland. It could have no operation whatever in respect to the navy. Farther than this he never could consent to go. He was well aware, that the impossibility of rising to all the advantages of the military profession must considerably damp the ardour of an officer; and though he could see no great objection, nor mischief, from giving to Catholic officers staff-rank in any other country than Ireland, yet there he conceived it exceedingly dangerous, and nothing could ever shake his opinion upon this point. The Irish parliament never would have consented to such a measure, and this parliament would do well to pause before they ventured to carry concession so much farther than the parliament who well understood the subject.
The Lord Chancellor (Erskine)
said, he considered the subject of the Catholic Ques-
259
260
The Marquis of Stafford
then rose, and gave notice of his intention to bring forward a question on that day, upon the subject of the dismissal of his majesty's late ministers, and moved, that their lordships be summoned for that day.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 26.
[MINUTES.]—Sir J. Newport
brought in two bills, the one for amending the act of last session relative to the Provision for the Poor in Ireland, and the other for authorising Commissioners - in the superior Courts of Law in Ireland, to administer Oaths in the absence of the Judges.—Mr. Sheridan brought in a bill for the erection of a Bridge across the Thames, at or near Southampton-street, to the Surrey side of the River. They were each read a first time —Mr. Robson complained that several papers, &c. relative to the Barrack Department, which had been ordered to be printed four months ago had not yet reached the members of that house. The country had sustained considerable loss by such delays. He asked what benefit it could be to the house that papers were ordered to be printed for the use of the members, if they were to be suffered to remain for such a length of time in the printer's hands? And gave notice of a motion relative to the production of papers in that department, shortly after the ensuing recess.—Sir S. Romilly brought in a bill to make the Freehold Property of Tradesmen dying intestate liable to prosecutions for the recovery of their debts, which was read a first time.— The Treasurer of t he Navy's Office Regulation bill, and the Sicilian Prize bill were read a third time and passed.—New writs were moved for the election of members to serve in parliament, for Northampton, in the room of the right hon. Spencer Perceval, who since his election had accepted of the office of Chancellor of his Majesty's Exchequer, and Chancellor of the Duchy of Cornwall during pleasure; for Buckingham, in the room of the Marquis of Titchfield, who had ac
261
[CHANGE OF ADMINISTRATION.] Mr. Huskisson
moved that the house at its rising do adjourn to Wednesday sen'night. Upon which,
Lord Howick rose
and spoke as follows: Sir, upon the motion which has just been made by the hon. gent. for an adjournment during the period which is usually allowed for a recess, at this season of the year, I trust it will not be thought irrelevant to the subject, if I take this opportunity of giving to the house that explanation of which I yesterday gave notice. It is of the utmost importance to myself and to my colleagues, that the circumstances which have led to the recent change of his majesty's ministers may be fully understood. It is of importance to the house, and to the public, that they may be enabled to form a proper estimate and opinion of the character and conduct of those persons to whom the administration of public affairs was so lately entrusted, and truly to appreciate all the circumstances of that situation, in which, in consequence of that change, the country is now placed. It is of importance to the house, in the decision of the question now stated from the chair, inasmuch as the propriety of an adjournment, of a longer or a shorter duration, may depend upon the necessity of adopting some measures, at the earliest possible period, to avert the conesequences of the extraordinary events which have taken place. To myself personally, every feeling both of duty and of honour renders it of the highest importance, that I should, as soon as possible, convince the house that my conduct has not been such as to make them repent of the kind indulgence which I have experienced from them. Undoubtedly, sir; every moment's delay, in which my conduct may be a matter of doubt with those
262
263
264
*
*
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
"for your majesty's decision,"
274
275
276
277
278
279
Mr Huskisson
said a few words in vindication of himself from the suspicion of being in any way concerned in the partial misrepresentation and suppression of the minutes of the cabinet. Besides, he thought that these minutes might have been very innocently communicated to others, who appear certainly to have made a very improper use of that communication.
Mr. Fuller rose
to ask the noble lord if the Slave Trade Abolition bill had been introduced into that house by the persons composing the late administration, in their individual capacities as members of parliament, or in their collective character of the government
Lord Howick
replied, that the bill in question had been introduced by certain of his colleagues and himself, in their individual capacity of members of parliament.
Mr. Fuller
wished to put another question to the noble lord: were the seals delivered up by the late ministers on Tuesday last?
Lord Howick
I have only to repeat what has been already stated, that his majesty required the seals of office on Tuesday: they were delivered in on yesterday morning.
Mr Brand
gave notice that he would, on Thursday fortnight, move certain Resolutions expressive of his opinion of the conduct of the late administration, and of the grounds upon which his majesty had been advised to dismiss his late servants.
General Loftus rose
to make two observations on what had fallen front the noble lord (Howick) first, in respect to the act of 1793, and what passed at that time in Ireland. The noble lord said that the Government of that day had pledged itself to carry into effect the boon granted to the Irish Catholics to England. The noble lord was mistaken; something only was held out, that possibly this boon might at a future day he extended to Great Britain, nothing more; there was no pledge whatever Besides, all that was granted to the Irish Catholics was the holding commissions in the army to a certain rank. But the noble lord's proposition went much farther; it extended to the highest ranks in the army—commander in chief, masters general of the
280
HOUSE OF LORDS:
Wednesday, April 8.
[MINUTES.]
The house met pursuant to adjournment About twenty peers were sworn in, and took their places. An interval then succeeded of apparently much suspense, when it was expected that the order of the day would he moved, for the marquis of Stafford's motion respecting the recent change of administration. After some consultation, however, between lords Holland, Grenville, Stafford, &c.
The Marquis of Stafford rose
and said, that in consequence of the indisposition of
281
The lord Chancellor (Eldon)
who this day took seat on the woolsack for the first time since his recent appointment, rose to make some observations on the probable impracticability that the report of the bill on the Scotch Judicature, could be ready before Tuesday; on that day it might be settled what situation was to be occupied by the Scotch judges during the present discussion. Until that decision took place, he was of opinion that the report on the-bill could not well be proceeded on. He should therefore move, that the report be taken into consideration on Wednesday next. Ordered.
HOUSE of COMMONS.
Wednesday April 8.
[MINUTES.]
The house met pursuant to adjournment About thirty new members were sworn, and took their seats.—The new ministers also took their seats on the treasury bench.—New writs were ordered for the borough of West Lone, in the room of James Buller, esq, who had accepted the office of one of the lords of the admiralty; for the borough of Weymouth, in the room of sir James Pulteney, who had accepted the office of secretary at war; for Dorchester, in the room of the hon. Cropley Ashley, who had accepted the office of clerk of the ordnance; for Liskeard, in the room of the hon. W. Elliot; who had accepted the office of one of the lords of the treasury; for the borough of Haslemore, in the room of R. Ward, esq. and for the county of Dumfries, in the room of the hon. W. Hope, who had accepted the offices of lords of the admiralty— Mr. Vansittart, chairman of the Shrewsbury election committee, reported, that general Ferguson had been absent from that committee for some days, on account of illness. Dr. Scott proved the fact of the general's illness, and he was excused for his said absence —Sir John Newport brought in the Irish Loan bill, which was read a first time.—The Irish malt and spirit duty bill was
282
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, April 9.
[MINUTES.]
The royal assent was given by commission to the royal family annuity bill, and the Irish paper duty bill. The commissioners were the lord chancellor, lord Aylesford, and lord Walsingham.—The treasuryship of the navy regulation bill, naval prizes bill, Irish malt duty bill, and Irish revenue regulation bill, were received from the commons, and read a first time.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, April 9.
[MINUTES.]—Sir W. Curtis
presented a petition from the London Clergy, incorporated by the title of the president and fellows of Sion College, within the city of London, setting forth, "That the petitioners have learnt that a bill has been for some time, and is now, depending in Parliament, for enabling his majesty to avail himself of the services of all his liege subjects in his naval and military forces, in the manner therein mentioned; and the petitioners feel it their duty to express their serious apprehensions of the dangers likely to arise from the said bill if carried into a law; and they conceive this measure to afford a most formidable precedent of departing, in a leading and important instance, from the principles of our constitution in church and state, as asserted in the ever-memorable Bill of Rights,
283
284
[CHANGE OF ADMINISTRATION.] Mr. Brand rose
for the purpose of bringing forward his promised motion, and addressed the house as follows:—I rise, sir, to submit to the house a few observations on a subject of great national importance, and involving in it questions of the most serious constitutional consideration. And in doing so, sir, I cannot help expressing my sincere regret that a duty of such moment had not devolved upon some member more competent to discharge it than the humble individual who in his zeal for the constitution, was heedless of the difficulties his inferiority must in such an undertaking have to contend against. But, sir, however inadequate I may prove, I have to conjure the house not to attribute the feebleness of the advocate to the weakness of the cause, but rather be disposed to conclude that, as a becoming sense of the greatness of the question and of the tribunal fills me with dismay, so should the indulgence of this house contribute to remove it. Sir, I could have wished to have staid those foul calumnies that presumed with equal ignorance and malice to prejudge and to condemn the motives that influenced the conduct of his majesty's late servants, so far as that conduct related to the unfortunate misunderstanding that led to their dismissal; and this, sir, not upon the principle of preferring any one ministry, or of adhering to any one party, but upon the great and unshaken conviction, that the unrestricted pro-
285
286
287
Mr. Lambe rose
to second the motion of his hon. friend, from which at no time could he refuse to withhold his support; but which at the present moment he thought a question of vital importance to the constitution; and had his speech even been less clear, eloquent, and satisfactory, he (Mr L.) should not have ventured to obtrude at length upon the indulgence of the house: for though the subject was of the first magnitude, yet he thought the spirit of the question lay within a very narrow compass. The rumours of an intended change of administration, and which so much agitated the public mind, he for one most deeply lamented to find realized; more especially as their dismissal was said to be in consequence of their declining to abdicate a right, or rather a duty, so important as that of advising their sovereign in all public matters to the best of their judgment and consciences. He was seriously concerned to see removed from the councils of their sovereign, the men who were such able props to the constitution, at a moment when their services were so necessary and he thought that the house would be wanting to its own dignity, if it deferred to express its opinion upon such a subject. He was glad, however, that the period of adjournment gave the house time to reflect calmly and deliberately upon the subject; to impress them with the necessity of adopting some resolution, expressive of their sentiments; and he therefore trusted, the one now proposed by his hon. friend, would be carried by a larger majority, and be adopted in a more decided manner, than any question which had ever been brought before that house. The constitution of this realm required that the king in exercising the functions of government, should take the advice of the two great councils of the nation, the houses of lords and commons. but the slow progress as well as publicity of their deliberations would, in many instances, destroy that secrecy, and interfere with that promptitude and dispatch, so often necessary to the success of the measures of the government. It had been adopted as a principle coeval with the constitution, that the right and duty of both houses to advise the sovereign, might be deputed to a selection from the members of both houses, chosen by his majesty as his privy councillors, by whose advice every act of the government was supposed to be guided; and thus, as far as was possible in a human institution, to give to the free government of England all the advantages of secrecy and dispatch which belong an ar-
288
289
General Craufurd
said, I rise, sir, with all that diffidence which a person naturally feels when he offers himself for the first time to the notice of so august an assembly as this, and that diffidence is extremely increased by a consciousness of my inability to do justice to a subject of such importance as that now before the house. But, sir, on this most momentous occasion, it is impossible for me to give a silent vote; and I am particularly desirous of explaining the motives which lead me now to differ from his majesty's late ministers with whom I used to act, and for many of whom I have long entertained the highest respect and esteem. I flatter myself, therefore, sir, that I shall experience that indulgence which the house is in the habit of extending with so much liberality to new speakers, and I will make the only return in my power, by trespassing as little on their time as possible. The present motion, sir, differs most widely from the notice that was given of it, and it contains an abstract proposition which cannot be discussed to any useful purpose, separately from its application; it has arisen immediately out of the late change in his majesty's councils. Though quite abstract in appearance, it has undoubtedly a retrospective view in this instance, and we must take it back to its source, and couple it with the causes that led to the removal of his majesty's late ministers from office, before we can properly entertain the discussion; we must not be led sway by an abstract theory from the real, though disguised object of the present motion. It is not my intention, sir, to enter upon the catholic question in general. I feel myself quite unequal to the discussion of a subject of such magnitude; I leave it therefore, in the hands of those who are far more able to do justice to it, and duly to appreciate its merits than I am, and I shall confine myself strictly to the motion before the house, and to the consideration of that part of the conduct of his majesty's late ministers, which immediately occasioned their removal from office, and which I hold to be so closely connected with that motion, as not to admit of separation. Before I enter upon this consideration, I must beg leave, sir, to make one or two preliminary observations, from which I think there can be but few dissentient voices; namely, that adverting to the deep-rooted and most conscientious scruples which have been long known to exist in the royal mind, with respect to the
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
Mr. Ord
in the few words he had to say, should not follow the example of the hon. general, but should abstain from any discussion of the merits of the Catholic bill. Though he had supported that bill, he thought the consideration of it wholly irrelevant to the present question. He was sorry his majesty's late ministers had consented to withdraw it, but that bill did not appear to him to have any thing to do with their removal from office. It was their refusal to give a pledge not to advise his majesty upon the subject, that had caused their removal, and if they had signed that pledge, there was no disgrace and reproach which they would not have merited. Such a pledge would have made the king absolute, and removed the responsibility of his ministers. He approved of the measures of the late ministers, and sincerely regretted their removal from office. But that regret might perhaps be lighter, if they had been succeeded by men of talents or abilities. But were not their successors the dregs of a disgraced
301
Mr. Whitsked Keene
expressed his regret to be forced to vote on the question, but felt compelled to vote against the motion, because he thought it amounted to an issue between his majesty and his late ministers, at the bar of that house. The Catholic bill is wholly irrelevant to the question; but as it had been introduced into the discussion, he should say upon it, that though he was a friend to the most unlimited toleration, he would not consent to any grant of power to them.
Mr. Wharton
objected to the motion on two grounds; the one, the words in which it was couched; the other, the line of argument which the hon. seconder had taken. He could not compliment the hon. gent. on his discretion in intimating, that although ministers ought not to consider themselves as under the controul of the king, they ought to consider themselves as under the controul of White Boys of Ireland. The hon. gent. by whom the motion had been seconded, seemed to ground his support on the idea, that when noble lords and gentlemen were called to the councils of his majesty, they had no power to retreat, but must continue in office whether they would or not. Another point on which he opposed the motion was, that it was incompatible with the wisdom of the house to entertain the discussion of any abstract proposition whatever. Many abstract propositions might be considered incontrovertible, except when they were applied to new cases; and surely no case could be more new, than that an administration should lend its weight in parliament to measures which had not only not received the concurrence of the king, but to which his majesty had expressed an absolute repugnance. He
302
Mr. Fawkes
declared that, in his opinion, the question was simply whether or not we were any longer to adhere to the British constitution. Under all the circumstances of the case, he thought that his majesty's ministers had acted discreetly in withdrawing the Roman Catholic bill; but he must at the same time say, that in abandoning the bill, they had paid all the deference that was due to the scruples of an august personage, to whose feelings the bill was repugnant. Had they proceeded one step further, had they signed any pledge for their future conduct, had they ceased for one moment to be the unfettered advisers of their sovereign in the present state of the British empire, they would have been lost beyond all hope of redemption to all sense of decency and shame, and have acted in the most unconstitutional and unjustifiable manner. The responsibility of ministers was the security of the privileges of this country, and distinguished it from every other. If those ministers were no longer free agents, where was this responsibility to be found? If they tied themselves down to give that advice to the crown which should be only palateable to it, in what a state of danger might the country be speedily placed! He was astonished, he was terrified at the language of the present
303
304
Mr. Osborn
would detain the house but for a very short time. He would leave to others who were better qualified to discuss it, the propriety of the measure, to the rash introduction of which the late ministers owed their dismissal. For himself, he was determined to give every assistance in his power to the maintenance of that constitution in church and state, in the principles of which he had been educated, and upon the religious observance of which he conceived the best security of that constitution to reside. Seeing no necessity whatever for the recognition of an abstract principle of the nature proposed, he would endeavour to get rid of it by moving, "That the other orders of the day be now read."—The original question and amendment having been read by the Speaker,
Mr. Bastard
observed, that the misconception with regard to the nature and extent of the measure brought forward by the late administration arose, as he understood, from the most imperfect explanation afforded his majesty by those ministers. He wished to know the precise grounds upon which the difference between them and an august personage arose. He never approved of the discussion of abstract propositions; and sooner than entertain that proposed by the hon. gent. who opened the debate, he would vote that the other orders of the day be now read.
Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald
said, he did not rise to consider the merits of the Catholic measure, though it was one, he confessed, of the first importance, and consequently entitled to every attention from the imperial legislature. With respect to the question immediately before the house, it was said in the course of debate, that the declaration of his majesty's ministers went the length of violating the prerogative of the crown;
305
306
307
Sir Thomas Turton
stated, that the original proposal of ministers went no farther than to make the act of 1793 valid in England. When they departed from this intention, it was their duty to explain it to his majesty; but did they do so? Did the noble lord explain those sweeping alterations, the tendency of which was to repeal the Test laws, as far as they regarded the army and navy? As to ministers claiming any merit for having abandoned the measure, he thought they would be more entitled to the praise of consistency and the support of the house, had they persevered in it. As it was, it looked as if they meant to claim for themselves all the merit of having introduced the measure, and of casting upon their sovereign the obloquy of its rejection. What, in fact, was the nature of the pledge, as it was called, required from them? They stipulate with their sovereign, that they shall be allowed to express their sentiments fully and freely upon a particular measure, when it shall come under consideration. To this he assents, but requires, at the same time, that he shall be no more importuned on a subject which is disagreeable to him. He says, in fact, 'You may do this,—but, when you have done so, let me hear no more about it.' An allusion had been made to the conduct of king William, on a particular occasion. If the hon. gent. who made it, had carried his researches a little further, he would have found, that that great prince had been so teazed by his ministers, that he actually meditated the abdication of the throne. Gentlemen who made appeals to the house and the country, would also do well to say something in favour of the prerogative. Several allusions had been made, in the course of the debate, to the system pursued by the late ministers with respect to Ireland. Did it follow that these salutary measures were to be abandoned? If they were conciliating, if they tended to secure the peace and tranquillity of that country, that would be of itself a sufficient inducement to the present administration to walk in the same path. Some political prophecies had been uttered in the course of the evening. To such predictions he paid but little attention. He generally found, that those who pronounced them, meant
308
Mr. Curwen
declared, that he was not disposed to pay any fulsome compliment to his majesty's late ministers; but he sincerely thought, that, for their manly, firm, and independent conduct, relative to the pledge that had been demanded of them, they were entitled to the thanks not only of that house, but of every independent Englishman, who had the least spark of British freedom in his breast; as they had, as far as was in their power, maintained, unimpaired, a great principle in the constitution of Great Britain, namely, that the ministers of an English monarch being responsible to parliament, should not, upon any account whatever, or at any risk, agree to refrain from giving their sovereign such advice, as in their opinion was most conducive to the interest of the empire, and the liberal character of the first magistrate of an independent people. They had most virtuously resolved, that they would not
309
Mr. Tuffnell
thought that the late uncalled-for change in the council of his majesty could not fail of making a deep impression onour allies, and of raising the expectation of our enemies, and this at a period when a firm reliance had been entertained on the assistance and the co-operation of Great Britain in the common cause; for, could any one assert that either at home or abroad, the slightest confidence could exist in the permanence of the present administration. The right which the crown possessed of appointing ministers, was undoubted, but it was necessary that the ministers appointed by the crown should possess the confidence of both the aristocracy and the democracy of the country. To what extent might not the principle of restraining ministers from proposing any one measure go? It might be productive of the most incalculable evils. The new administration seemed to emulate the giants, who, when they were overthrown and touched the earth, recovered their strength: for it was not long since they had doubted their power to carry on the government of the country, and since that time their attempts at opposition had been repeatedly defeated.
Mr. Fuller
contended, that this was just a question between one set of ministers and another. As to the pledge demanded by his majesty, if any minister had advised the abrogation of the Bill of Rights, or the dissolution of Magna Charta, he should like to know whether the king would not have been justified in demanding from them a promise to refrain from such advice in future, and, if their word was not to be trusted, to demand that promise in writing? Forty years ago, such advice as had been given to his majesty, would have been impeachable. He remembered the time, not 30 years since, when lord North gave up this point, and sent to Ireland 70,000 stand of arms, which had since been used in rebellion against this country. Some people said, that the late ministry had done great things. He thought the great family of which it was chiefly composed, had been always very full of theories, and no family had been better paid for their theories. By the first theory we lost America; by the second, the election act, a most contemptible court had been produced; and by the last and most fatal, the slave trade had been abolished. He
310
Mr. Plunkett
(attorney-general for Ireland)
considered this question as important in the abstract; but tenfold more imperious when viewed in connection with the late measure which was supposed to lead to the dismissal of his majesty's servants. The hon. baronet (sir T. Turton), who had spoken, had asserted, that the resolution went to attach blame to his majesty. He was most anxious to deliver himself, and those who concurred in opinion with him, from such an imputation; for he had, the highest respect for his majesty, and believed him to be utterly incapable of doing any thing of himself which was not called for by the interests of his people; and, therefore, those who had secretly advised him, had done a double injury; first, in inducing his majesty to believe that he was acting contrary to the interests of his people; and next, in persuading him to demand an unconstitutional pledge. Those who had led the Father of his People to believe that such a pledge was proper to be demanded, and who persuaded him that the Protestant establishment was in danger, had taken upon themselves the responsibility. The house had yet to learn how the Protestant establishment was endangered. He would keep that point in view in what he had to say, for as he was firmly persuaded that the safety of the empire depended on our connection with Ireland, so, he was convinced, that our salvation depended no less upon the stability of our Protestant establishment; and therefore he was an enemy to every thing that could have a tendency to injure that establishment. If there were grounds for apprehension on that score, nothing could
311
312
313
314
per ignes suppositos cineri doloso
The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Perceval)
agreed most completely with his right hon. and learned friend, that nothing would be more contrary to the freedom of debate in that house, or to a full and open discussion of the different questions that might come before them, than the maxim, that political prophets wished to accomplish the evils which they foretold. He agreed that the consequences which might be dreaded from any measures, ought to be freely stated. But when he allowed that freedom to others, and put the best construction on their motives, he had a right to expect that similar freedom should be allowed to himself, and that his motives should receive the same liberal construction. If he, therefore, however erroneous his opinion might have been, thought that the measure lately introduced; a measure which the late ministers represented as so essential to the welfare of the nation, and which they had notwithstanding this abandoned—if he thought that it was pregnant with danger to the constitution, it ought
315
Mr. Plunket
here rose, and expressed his regret at interrupting the right hon. gent., but what he had said was, that i
316
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
in continuation, observed, that no apology For the interruption was required, because it was better to interrupt him, than to allow him to go on under a mistake. He agreed that it was improper to make use of his majesty's name for party purposes, or to influence discussions in that house, as had been done on the present occasion, in a manner absolutely unprecedented. The endeavour to procure addresses in this case was not unconstitutional, but he was extremely desirous to come to the question. As to the merits of the late ministry, his opinion of their measures had been stated on different occasions. But he could not confine himself merely to the words of the motion. The proposition was itself one which would be generally admitted; but it must be taken in connection with other circumstances, and especially the dismissal of his majesty's late ministers. It was not the expression only that was to be considered, but the implication, for it must be implied that the dismissal of the late ministers was an act deserving of censure. The implication was clear when the motion was coupled with the statement of the noble lord (Howick) relative to a pledge required and refused, and the consequent dismissal of the ministers; but more particularly so when the words respecting the impropriety of granting a pledge, "either expressed or implied," were considered, which must be understood to apply to the present ministers. [Hear! hear! from the opposition.] He was glad that he had distinctly understood the nature of the motion, but he wished that the hon. gent. who had opened it had stated that and not left it to be implied. However, if he understood the question, it would appear extraordinary if he should be debarred from considering it with a relation to circumstances, and as implying a censure on the crown. But it was impossible, in justice to the sovereign, if he was to be called to the bar, and arraigned. [a loud cry of hear! hear! order! order!] that the question should be considered without a reference to circumstances. He felt himself under great embarrassment on this occasion. They said that his majesty was not censurable, but his advisers. Now, it was contrary to the fact, that his majesty acted in this case, in consequence of any advice; he denied that any advice was given him on this point;—[hear! hear!] He did not mean as to the dismissal of the ministers, but as to the pledge. He would afterwards maintain the propriety of requiring that pledge; but as far as he knew
317
318
319
320
Mr. Grattan
said, the bill which was the immediate cause of the dismissal of his majesty's late ministers had his entire approbation, as he thought thereby we should have combined the physical with the intellectual force of the empire. The question now under the consideration of the house might very properly be divided into two heads; first, the conduct of the late ministers in respect to the Catholics; secondly, their conduct relatively to his majesty. The great object, as to the Catholics, was, that the bill lately brought into the house by the noble lord near him, had been promised to Ireland more than 13 years ago; and the particular reason was, that the Irish officer in England might be on a similar footing with the English officer, and it was certainly no more than justice that it should be so. The right hon. gent. had said, that the objection had been attended to and remedied by the mutiny bill; but that in fact was not the case, and it was certainly very wrong to have left the Irish officer, in case of his coming into this country, liable to the penalty of 500
l
321
322
323
324
Dr. Duigenan
began by stating that it had been said by several honourable gentlemen on different occasions, that the greater part of the army and navy of this country consisted of Irish Catholics. He denied such to be the fact; and insisted that those Irishmen who were in our army and navy, were mostly Protestants. It had also been said, that there were 4 millions of Catholics in Ireland; but this statement was equally fallacious with the other: for the whole population of that country amounted to only three millions and a half. The Protestants were in proportion to the Catholics, as two to three in number; and in property, to fifty to one. The house had been told, that the Roman Catholics would be satisfied if it gave them the advantages of serving in the army and navy, as intended by the late bill. He would tell the house when the Roman Catholics would be satisfied: if Ireland were given up to them, and they were suffered to plunder and destroy all the property in it, they might then perhaps be content. They had at all times, and on every occasion, evinced a marked inveteracy against the Protestants; and in the insurrection of 1798, they had, at the very outset of the business, so prepared their schemes, that they actually destroyed 5000 Protestants in cold blood, in the course of a short time. They had burnt 180 in one barn, and committed every act of cruelty that could well be imagined. Many of them had been confined in prisons for a length of time; and after being liberated, had been found to be the most active abettors and supporters of the very next disturbances that had happened. According to the late minister's late bill, these men might be commanders-in-chief of the army, and admirals of the fleets of this country, whose daggers were yet red with the blood of their Protestant brethren. It was impossible to admit Roman Catholics to any portion of civil power; for they had a temporal power mixed with their civil and ecclesiastical establishment, which they lodged in the hands and supremacy of a foreign power, who was at this time under the rule and direction of Buonaparte, who nominated the bishop, and he the priest. There was at this moment an army in Ireland in the pay of Buonaparte. Gentlemen talked of conciliating the higher
325
l
Lord Howick rose
to order. He said, the honourable and learned doctor had, if he understood him right, stated that there was a noble lord, not in that house, who had endeavoured to subvert the protestant religion, a crime of the greatest magnitude; and he called on him, if he were a man, to name that noble lord, that he might be arraigned at the bar of the house, and brought to that punishment which his crime deserved.
Mr. Plumer
desired, that if the hon. gent. knew of any noble lord who had been guilty of so great a crime, he would name him, as he thought it was his duty to do.
The Speaker
said, he apprehended that every member had a right, according to the order of that house, to deliver his sentiments in such terms as he should choose, provided he did it with decency; and that he was not bound to name whom he alluded to, nor to
326
Mr. Horner
said, if it was not too late, he would wish the words to be taken down.
The Speaker
said, that in cases when any thing had intervened before it was desired to take down the words, it was too late to make such a motion.
Mr. Sheridan
wished to know whether he had rightly comprehended what the hon. and learned doctor had said. He understood him to say, that a noble lord, a privy counsellor to his majesty, had attempted to subvert the Protestant religion. The honourable and learned gent. ought, therefore, to name him, that he might be proceeded against as such a crime deserved.
Lord Howick
apprehended the order of the house was made for the purpose of conducting the debates with decency and decorum; and therefore, that the name of a member of that house was not allowed to be mentioned in the discussion of any subject under consideration. If that was the case, he looked upon it as much more disorderly to mention the name of a member of the other house, as it might be the means of creating animosities between the two branches of the legislature. He thought, therefore, he was strictly justified in calling upon the hon. and learned doctor to name the noble lord he had alluded to; for such was his high respect for that noble personage, that he could not sit still, and hear such a charge made, without taking the notice of it he had done.
Mr. Secretary Canning
conceived that the question of order had been decided by the chair, and that whatever imprudence there might be in the expression, it was not so disorderly as to authorize the call which had been made for the name of the noble lord alluded to.
Mr. Grenville
said, it was impossible for him to believe, till he heard it from the chair, that the hon. and learned gent., after the charge he had made against a peer of the realm, should not be obliged to name that noble lord to whom he had alluded, that he might be proceeded against as the nature of his offence required.
The Speaker
said, that being now called upon to declare his opinion, he would state it according to the best of his ability. As he understood the order of that house, it was not allowable to mention the name of any member, as it might tend to create altercation, and to interrupt the harmony and decorum of debate. He always understood, however, that it was competent to any member of that house, in the course of his speech, to allude
327
Dr. Duigenan
admitted that he had spoken with too much warmth on the subject; but if he had used any harsh expression, he was sorry for it. As well as he recollected, he had used the words, "a noble lord not in this house." Now it would be recollected that there were many noble lords who were not members of either house. Having made this apology, he should not occupy the time of the house any longer.
Sir Samuel Romilly
said, he should leave to the noble lord opposite (lord Castlereagh) to state to the house, what had been promised to the Catholics of Ireland, and to assign, if he was able to do so, his reasons for now abandoning them: he had no desire to revive any animosities on account of religious differences of opinion. The question now before the house was one which involved most important constitutional doctrines: it was highly interesting to the people at large, and as interesting to the sovereign himself as to any of his subjects. It was, however, a question which, although it contained an abstract proposition, was necessary to be brought before the house, because it referred to a principle which had been recently acted upon. The true question before the house was, whether or not it was constitutionally justify
328
329
Mr. Jeffery rose
to order. He conceived the hon. and learned gent. was making an allusion equally personal with that made before by the learned doctor, and that he ought to name the name to which he had alluded.
Mr. Ward
conceived, that by an analogical deduction from the decision of the chair, in the case of the learned doctor, the hon and learned gent. was perfectly justified in the allusion he had made.
Sir Samuel Romilly
proceeded. He observed that, by the constitution of the country, the choice of his ministers was undoubtedly vested in the king. He might call to his councils whom he pleased, but that act must be done by advice, and the adviser must be responsible. If it was allowable for ministers to exclude themselves from giving advice on any one subject, they might extend the same exclusion to others. They might bind themselves not to give advice as to the policy of peace or war, on commerce or finance till they left themselves no duty to exercise. It was, however, of the greatest importance to his majesty that the doctrine of responsible advisers should be strictly maintained. History had unfolded the evils of
330
Mr. Bathurst
regretted much that a question should be introduced to the consideration of that house which necessarily brought into discussion the personal conduct of the sovereign. The proposition stated by the learned gent. who had just sat down, that there was no act of the crown without responsibility, was no doubt correct, generally speaking, but yet there were some exceptions to that proposition, and among the first that must be admitted, where his majesty had no advisers. Such was the case when he had removed his ministers; and unless the exception to responsibility be allowed in that case, the king's prerogative of choosing his own ministers must be nugatory. Now, as such changes were liable often to occur, he could not but deprecate the idea of making his majesty's motives of action in those instances a matter for investigation in that house, and still more did he deprecate the public statement of his majesty's private confidential communications with his ministers, particularly as individuals. It was monstrous, then, to say that his majesty could not in any case act without advice, for in cases of this nature where he differed from his ministers, he had no advisers, and re-
331
332
Sir Peter Murray (in a maiden speech)
said, that he fully agreed in the just and constitutional sentiments which the house had just heard. But before he proceeded to animadvert upon the motion before the house, he thought it necessary to advert to the remarks of the hon. and learned gent. (sir S.
333
334
Sir S. Romilly
in explanation, said that he did not mean in the least degree to reflect upon the determination of the peers on a recent trial. He only intended to call to the recollection of the house, that there had been objections both to the form of the articles, and to the manner of the proof, and that 52 lords had said upon their honour, that lord Melville was guilty.
Mr. Whitbread
after complimenting the candour, moderation, and manliness with which the question before the house had been treated by his hon. friend who introduced it, observed, that from the various and contradictory sentiments which had been delivered,
335
336
337
338
Mr. Rose
said, that at the time the pledge was demanded from his majesty's late ministers, there could be no responsible advisers. If then, there were no advisers, what were those who supported the motion doing, but trying his majesty's conduct at the bar of the house? [Loud cry of question! Question.]
Lord Howick
observed that the impatience which was exhibited to come to a decision, would induce him to occupy as little of the time of the house as possible. Some things, however, had passed, which he thought himself bound to notice. The allusions which had been made to lord Melville, he maintained, were not foreign to the discussion. The hon. baronet under the gallery (sir Peter Murray) had called the late administration a faction: what part of their conduct deserved that appellation, he would leave it to the house and the country to determine; but he defied the hon. baronet to produce any instances of power exerted against lord Melville: If it were decent to enter into an examination of the proceedings on that trial, it would be easy to shew, that a great majority of the peers, holding office voted for the acquittal. With regard to the motion, he
339
340
341
Mr. Secretary Canning rose
amidst a loud call for the question from the opposition benches. He was not surprised on a motion brought forward for the purpose of turning out an administration, that those who supported it should wish to drown by clamour what those ministers had to say in their defence. But however reluctant he might be to trespass on the time of the house at that late hour, and, in the exhaust-
342
343
à fortiori
344
345
346
347
Lord Henry Petty
observed, that however that house might be attacked, however it might be threatened, whatever unconstitutional language might be used towards it, he relied on the manly constitutional spiritand understanding of the house, that no such intimidation could induce it to surrender a constitutional principle. There was not one single member on the other side of the house that had answered the arguments of his. noble friend (lord Howick). A great constitutional wrong had been done, and the house would act consistently with what was due to its own character, by declaring with firmness its sense of that wrong. The only mode by which gentlemen on the other side defended the question on their side, was by a repetition of the mis-statements, which had already been repeatedly contradicted and disproved. He now again stated, that the proposition of any new measure, connected with the Catholic question, if circumstances should render it expedient to make such proposition, was, by the declaration of his majesty's late ministers, to be submitted to his majesty. An hon. gent. on the other side, however, had put a hypothetical case, and supposed that another king James might happen to ascend the throne, who would make this measure the means of subverting the Protestant establishment in this country. To this he answered, that if such a king were to ascend the throne, it would then become the duty of ministers to give manly, constitutional advice, however it might be repugnant to the feeling of the then king. But, if it were once admitted as a principle, that a king had a right to demand of his ministers a pledge, that they would not again trouble him with any advice connected with that subject, then truly would the Protestant establishment be in danger. For his own part, although he believed that the motion of his hon. friend would be carried that night by a majority, he did not believe that, had the Catholic bill been persevered in, the influence of the late government exerted at that time could have secured its adoption.—The question being loudly called for, the house divided on the amendment to the original motion, namely, that the other orders of the day be now read. While the opposition members were in the lobby, lord Howick requested their attention: he stated that there were two motions before the house, the first, that the
348
For Mr. Osborn's amendment
258
For the original motion
226
––
Majority for Ministers
32
List of the Minority.
Althorpe, Viscount
Dundas, Right Hon. W.
Anson, Col. G.
Doyle, Sir John, Bart.
Anstruther, Sir J. Bart.
Dickenson, W.
Adam, W.
Davenport, D.
Antonie, W. L.
Euston, Earl
Atherley, Arthur
Ebrington, Lord
Aubrey, Sir J. Bart.
Eliot, Right Hon. W.
Blackburne, J.
Elliot, Hon. G.
Bruce, P. C.
Eden, Hon. W.
Barclay, Sir R. Bart.
Erskine, Hon. H.
Baring, A.
Forbes, Lord
Baring, T.
Fitzgerald Right Hon. M.
Baring, H.
Flemming, Hon. C.
Barnett, J.
Ferguson, R.
Butler, Hon. T.
Fawkes, W.
Butler, Hon. C.
Fellowes, R.
Bligh, T.
Foley, T.
Bennett, Hon. H. G.
Foley, Hon. A.
Benyon, R.
Foljambe, F. F.
Barnard, S.
Francis, Sir P. Bart.
Bouverie, E.
Fremantle, Capt.
Biddulph, R. M.
Frankland, W.
Brogden, T.
Folkestone, Lord
Byng, G.
Grenville, Right Hon. T.
Brand, Hon. T.
Giles, D.
Bewick, C.
Grenfell, P.
Bradshaw, C.
Greenhill, R.
Bradshaw, R. H.
Grattan, Right Hon. H.
Bunbury, Sir C.
Graham, T.
Brooke, T.
Gower, Lord G. H. L.
Cooper, S.
Heathcote, Sir G.
Combe, H. C.
Herbert, Hon. W.
Cavendish, Lord G.
Hibbert. G.
Cavendish, G. H. C.
Herbert, Hon. c.
Cavendish, Wm.
Hippesley, Sir J. Bart.
Coke, T. W.
Herbert, H. A.
Colborne, N. W. R.
Hume, W. H.
Cooke, B.
Henderson Sir J. Bart.
Curwin, S. C.
Hamilton, Lord A.
Creevey, T.
Hamilton, Sir H. D.
Corry, Right Hon. T.
Honywood, W.
Calvert, N.
Horner, F.
Campbell, G.
Howard, Hon. W.
Cornwall, Sir G. Bart.
Howard, H.
Carew, R. S.
Howarth, H.
Colclongh, G.
Howick, Right Hon. Lord
Campbell, Lord J. D.
Hughes, Col. W.
Denison, W. J.
Hurst, R.
Dundas, Col. C.
Jarvoise, J. C.
Dundas, Hon. L.
Jekyll, J.
Dundas, Hon. C.
Jackson, J.
349
Johnes, Col.
Plummer, J. W.
Knox, Hon. T.
Prettie, Hon. J. A.
Kempe, T.
Parnell, H.
Kensington, Rt. Hon. Lord
Power, Rich.
King, Sir T. D. Bart.
Portchester, Lord
Knight, R.
Porter, General
Lambe, Hon. W.
Poyntz, W. S.
Latouche, Col.
Praed, W.
Ladbrooke, R.
Pym, F.
Langston, T.
Quin, Hon. W.
Lambton, R. J.
Ramsay, Hon. S.
Lawrence, Dr.
Raine, J.
Lemon, Sir W. Bart.
Rancliffe, Lord
Lloyd, J.
Ridley, Sir W.
Lloyd, Sir E. Bart.
Romilly, Sir S.
Lismore, Lord
Roscoe, W.
Loveden, E. L.
Russell, Lord W.
Lyttleton, Hon. W. H.
Robarts, A.
Leach, T.
Steward, Hon. M.
Lushington, T.
Skene, G.
Lubbock, Sir T. Bart.
Savage, F.
Liddell, Sir J. H. Bart.
Sawbridge, M.
Mackenzie, Major
Scudamore, R. P.
Madocks, W.
Shakespeare, A.
Maitland, Lord
Sharpe, R.
Markham, Admiral
Sheridan, Right Hon. R. B.
Middleton, Sir W. Bart.
Shelley, H.
Milbank, Sir R. Bart.
Shipley, Colonel
Miller, Sir J. Bart.
Spencer, Lord R.
Milner, Sir W. Bart.
Stanley, Lord
Morpeth, Lord
Stanley, T.
Moore, P.
Symonds, T. P.
Moore, Hon. L.
Smith, J.
Martin, H.
Smith, S.
Matthew, H. M.
Tighe, W.
Mosley, Sir O. Bart.
Taylor, A.
Maule, Hon. W.
temple, Lord
M'Dowall, W.
Thistlethwaite, T.
Morris, E.
Templetown, Lord
Mostyn, Sir T.
Tower, A. W.
Mahon, Lord
Townshend, Lord J.
M'Donald, T.
Tuffnell, Colonel
Monson, Col. W.
Tierney, Right Hon. G.
Nugent, Sir G. Bart.
Trevannion, Mr.
Newport, Sir J.
Vane, Sir F. Bart.
Neville, Hon. Mr.
Vernon, G.
Noel, G. N.
Vansittart, G.
Northey, W.
Walpole, Gen.
O'Callaghan, T.
Ward, J.
Ogle, Hon. H. M.
Wentworth, G.
Ord, W.
Wharton, J.
Ossulston, Rt. Hon. Lord
Whitbread, S.
Ponsonby, Hon. F.
Wickham, W.
Primrose, Rt. Hon. Lord
Williams, O.
Paxton, Sir W. Bart.
Wilson, B.
Peirse, H.
Windham, W.
Plunkett, C.
Woolmore, J.
Pelham, Hon. C. A.
Wynne, Sir W. W.
Pelham, Hon. G.
Wynne, C. W.
Percy, Lord
Wynne, H.
Petty, Lord H.
Warren, Sir J. B. Bart.
Phillips, Mansel
Calcraft, J.
Tellers
Piggott, Sir A.
Fremantle, W.
Plumer, W.
Total - - 228
The following members paired off:
Courtney, J.
Henderson, A.
Fitzpatrick, G.
Ferguson, G.
Smyth, Right Hon. J.
Smith, G.
Western, C.
Astley, Sir J.
Taylor, C.
Williams, Sir R.
350
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, April 10.
[MINUTES.] Mr. Wilberforce
brought up a report from the committee appointed to enquire into the merits of the petition complaining of an undue election for the county of Londonderry, and obtained leave for the adjournment of the said committee, until again summoned by the Speaker's warrant, in order that time should be allowed to the commissioners for examining evidence upon this subject in Ireland.—Upon the motion of Mr. G. Rose, new writs were ordered for Christchurch, in the room of the right hon. George Rose, who, since his election, had accepted the office of treasurer of the navy ; and of Mr. S. Bourne, who had accepted the office of one of the lords commissioners of the treasury.—Upon the motion of sir J. Newport, the Irish Stamp Duty bill, and the Irish Servants' Wages bill, were read a third time and passed. —MT. Lyttleton gave notice of his intention to submit to the house a motion on Wednesday next, expressive of its sentiments with regard to the late change of administration.—The bill for raising a fund to provide for the Widows and Orphans of Schoolmasters in Scotland; and the Dover Pilots Regulation bill, were read a second time, and ordered to be committed.—Mr. Swan gave notice, that he would on Monday move that the petitioners from Lancaster upon the subject of colonel Cawthorne's Election should be heard by counsel at the bar.—Mr. Huskisson, adverting to an order made last session, upon the motion of a noble lord (H. Petty), whom he then saw in his place, for the production of an account with regard to the Scotch excise for a certain number of years, observed, that, in pursuance of that order, there were now behind him two huge volumes, which only contained the accounts of one year, although almost all the clerks in the establishment had been engaged since the order, in preparing it. Now, as he could not conceive the object of the noble lord, or the utility of a compliance with his motion, he gave notice that he would on Monday move for rescinding the order with regard to the 23 preceding years to which it referred.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, April 13.
[CHANGE OF ADMINISTRATION.]
The order of the day for summoning their lordships having been read,
351
The Marquis of Stafford rose
pursuant to notice, to submit a motion to the house, respecting the consequences of the late change in his majesty's councils. He expressed his regret that a matter of such delicacy and importance had not been taken up by abler hands; but observed that there were times and circumstances under which it was the duty of every noble lord in that house to come forward and offer the best advice his judgment could suggest for the maintenance of the public good. It had always been his anxious wish to see the best talents and abilities the country could boast of, United in a rival exertion of those talents for the public welfare; but he had to lament the loss of one distinguished man (Mr. Pitt) at a most critical period of our affairs, which considerably weakened the administration of which he was the head. He next had the satisfaction of seeing another ministry constituted, which certainly embraced a very great portion of the character, integrity, and talents of the nation. This ministry also lost one of its main supporters (Mr. FOX); but still it was one from which he expected the country would reap much benefit. That administration had recently, and very unexpectedly, been removed; and he was sorry to observe, that their removal did not seem to be accounted for on any constitutional and satisfactory grounds. By this double loss, and by the change that had thus taken place in his majesty's councils, the affairs of the nation were left in a situation which he could not but lament. Indeed, much as he lamented it, he had still more to lament the causes that led to that change, and the nature of the advice which induced his Majesty to make it. For, advisers in so critical a measure his majesty most undoubtedly had, whoever those advisers might be. It was an excellent maxim of the constitution, a sacred one in his eyes, which made the person of the sovereign inviolable; and which, by pronouncing he could do no wrong, rescued him from all responsibility for any public measure. That maxim he was confident their lordships would maintain, and upon it he would rest the necessity of adopting the motion, at least in part, which he should have the honour of concluding with. He trusted that nothing he should offer would be construed into personal disrespect to his majesty; of that he was incapable from principles of duty, as well as from inclination and gratitude; but his anxiety for the
352
Lord Aberdeen rose
in reply to the noble marquis. The question now started appeared to him to involve a very serious inconvenience, inasmuch as it intimately connected itself with the personal conduct of the sovereign. That was unavoidable, however studious noble lords might be to avoid it. For though it appeared a general and abstract proposition, it was calculated, at the same time, to serve as a justification of the conduct of the late ministers; and by justifying them, to insinuate blame in some other quarter. He could not but
353
354
The Earl of Hardwicke
expressed his deep regret at the change which had taken place in his majesty's councils, and lamented that a cry should have been set up which could only tend to revive religious dissensions, and produce the most deplorable consequences, and for which there was not the slightest reason arising out of the conduct of the late ministers. Those ministers, anxious, from the best motives of policy, that the whole population of the empire should be effective towards its defence, wished to extend the provisions of the bill passed in the Irish parliament in 1793, to this country. They afterwards found that if merely that measure was adopted, dissenters would be excluded from those privileges which were granted to Catholics; it was therefore deemed necessary to include dissenters, and open the army and navy to both classes. With respect to the act of 1793, he had understood, from what had been said by a noble lord (Buckinghamshire), who was then secretary in Ireland, that it was at that period intended to extend the provisions of the bill to this country, and that the bill itself was understood to extend to the navy. [The earl of Buckinghamshire said no, no.] He had understood that to be the case.
The Earl of Buckinghamshire
observed, that what he had stated, and which he was authorized at the time to state, in addition to the objects of the then intended bill with respect to Ireland, was, that it was the intention of his majesty's then ministers to propose a similar measure in this country; but certainly the bill of 1793 was not intended to extend, nor did he ever understand it to extend, to the navy.
The Earl of Hardwicke
resumed. It had, he said, been the opinion of several able lawyers, that the bill did extend to the navy. The bill, however, which the late ministers introduced, was one which did not afford the slightest reason for that cry which had been raised against it; on the contrary, it was, in his opinion, a highly beneficial measure. The bill, however, was given up out of respect to his majesty's feelings upon the subject; and then a pledge was demanded from the late ministers, which he could not but consider as highly unconstitutional. He lamented the change that had taken place in his majesty's councils. Conceiving the late ministers to be much more adequate to the task of managing
355
Lord Erskine rose
and said: My lords, the particular situation in which I was placed in his majesty's late councils, as it regards the subject now under consideration, and the many public references which have been made in various places to my office and to my opinions respecting it, make it not unfit, I hope, that I should seek the earliest opportunity, consistently with the forms of the house, of delivering my opinion to your lordships.—The opinions of men, my lords, upon this, as upon most other subjects, must be expected materially to differ; but there is one thing in which I am persuaded all men of honour must agree, i. e. that the case should be fairly stated, and that the question to be presented to the understandings of those who are to judge of any matter, be it what it may, should not be disguised or misrepresented. Many triumphs in large assemblies, and still more amongst large communities, have been obtained by artifice and imposture, but besides that they are most contemptible, they cannot possibly be lasting. Fact and reason must for ever prevail in the end.—The circumstances which have given rise to this extraordinary conjuncture, though involved and complicated in their details, may be brought within a very narrow compass; within, I should think, ten minutes by your clock: yet without omitting any thing upon which a difference in the argument could ultimately be taken by any can did or reasonable man. I will state the matter to your lordships as I understand it; and as I was no party to the transaction, as nothing blameable, if there be blame any where, can possibly attach upon myself, I may at least be expected to be an impartial historian, and an historian too near the scene, to have gross ignorance or error reasonably imputed to me.—My lords, it has been the fashion to represent the introduction of the bill into the house of commons, which led to the dissolution of the late administration as an extravagant act of political suicide; as a rash, useless, and wanton proposition, dictated by no expediency, and opposed by insurmountable obstacles, within the knowledge of those who introduced it. Nay, my lords, charges much more serious have been made. It has been more than insinuated, that, to overcome these obstacles, recourse was had to the
356
357
in toto
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
The Earl of Jersey
supported the motion, which, he contended, was called for by the extraordinary circumstances that had recently occurred. That some farther concessions should be made to the Catholics,
366
Lord Harrowby
began by observing, that he fell under the same embarrassment as the noble earl who had just spoken, from the want of proper documents. This deficiency was in itself a sufficient parliamentary ground for refusing to assent to the motion of his noble relation. No motion, he said, pretending to be grounded upon facts, ought to be entertained, unless it rests either upon facts notorious, or admitted on all sides, or proved by documents on our table. The nature of the present case admits of no such proof: it rests upon statements of the contents of dispatches which we have not seen; of the contents of confidential communications between the king and his cabinet, which are not, and cannot be before us: and upon the relation, not so much of the terms of confidential conversations between the same parties, as of the impression which such conversations made upon the minds of those who held them. Such are the documents on which we are called upon to assent to a motion, which, grounding itself solely upon the defence brought forward by one party, is in fact (though I trust not in intention) an accusation against the other; a motion which places your lordships in a situation, equally unknown to the theory and the practice of the constitution, equally alien from your legislative and judicial functions, the situation of sitting in judgment upon the personal conduct of your sovereign. I am well aware that the mention of his name within these walls is in itself disorderly, but the nature of this question renders it impossible to be avoided. More need not be said to prove at once the indecorous and unparliamentary character of the debate into which we are driven. I shall not however forget the doctrine laid down in another place by what is now the highest authority in this house, that the right which necessity creates, necessity limits. So far at least it will be agreed on all sides, that before we determine to assert an abstract proposition, for the declared
367
368
369
370
371
372
conditio regnandi
373
374
375
376
The Earl of Selkirk
declared, that the propositions contained in the resolution moved by the noble marquis had, in the abstract, his unqualified assent. He had no doubt of the principle, that a privy counsellor, who should restrain himself by a pledge, from advising his majesty to the best of his judgement, would be guilty of a high breach of duty. He was also satisfied, that the late administration possessed and deserved the confidence of the country. He did not mean to imply an unreserved approbation of all their proceedings; but he did not expect to see an administration of more than human perfection. The fair criterion, by which to judge the late administration was, to compare their conduct with that of others; and in this view he was ready to maintain, that considering the short duration of their power, they had accomplished, or put into a fair train of accomplishment, more important measures of public good, and that with less of reprehensible conduct, than perhaps any administration within our memory. He was also of opinion, that in the present state of Europe, the loss of a firm and stable administration
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
Lord Boringdon
said, he thought the resolution proposed was much too vague and indefinite, and as such he should, before he sat down, make a motion for the purpose of getting rid of it without coming to any resolution on the subject. The latter part of it, he thought, was a kind of surprise on the house, and he was of opinion that none of it was called for by any circumstances which could induce the house to come to any resolution. It was in his mind a proposition which their lordships ought to entertain with much caution, as it related so very nearly and particularly to the personal conduct of the king. A pledge had been required from his majesty's late ministers, respecting the bringing forward a particular question; and it had been assumed that the present ministers had entered into some such pledge. He believed, however, from the declaration of the noble secretary of state below him, that no such pledge had been given by the present ministers. Indeed, there could be no occasion for asking it, for they had never shewn themselves favourable to the Catholic question. He was also adverse to the proposed resolution on another ground. He did not think it would be binding on the house. Their lordships would recollect, that in the reign of queen Elizabeth, that house came to a resolution, while at war with Spain, that the country should make no peace with a prince of the house of Bourbon; yet the queen and her ministers made peace very soon afterwards, and the resolution of the house was so much waste paper, and no more. He was ready to absolve the late ministers from the imputation which had been charged upon them, of having attempted to force on the king any measure that militated against his feelings or his conscience; but he could not absolve them from negligence and inattention in the mode in which they had conducted themselves. He adverted particularly to the uncertainty and ambiguity contained in the Irish dispatch, and thought them blameable in endeavouring to obtain his majesty's opinion through the medium of a draft of a dispatch. He thought if the noble lord at the head of the late administration had openly and candidly communicated directly with his majesty on this important and delicate subject, the late misunderstanding could not have happened. As to the pledge, about which so much had been said, he would ask, whether, under all the circumstances which had been stated, it was very extraordinary the king should require such a security to his peace of mind,
386
Lord Kinnaird
said, he was both surprised and sorry to hear the sentiments expressed in the noble lord's speech, but more particularly the latter part of it, in which he said that the Catholics would not be angry when they saw their complaints were not attended to from any intrigue or cabal, but that they must solely attribute it to the will of his majesty. This, he thought, was not the happiest way of reconciling that large body of men to the opposition made to their claims, or of conciliating their affections, which had been weakened by repeated disappointments. The noble lord had told their lordships, that he objected to the resolution, be-
387
388
389
Lord Sidmouth
said, that the motion of the noble baron had relieved him from a considerable degree of difficulty. He could not have concurred in giving a negative to a resolution which expressed regret at the late change in his majesty's government, and which also stated the impropriety of acceding to any pledge, that might fetter the conduct of ministers in the discharge of their public duty. To the previous question he should have objected, because he was of opinion, that such a proposition as that brought forward by the noble marquis (Stafford) ought not to be entertained under any circumstances; and it therefore appeared to him, that the proper mode of disposing of it, was by a vote of adjournment.—The resolution proposed by the noble marquis must be considered as arising out of the discussion which immediately preceded the Easter recess, and the renewal of it only served to increase the regret which he had felt at the time, and ever since, that such a discussion should have taken place. Every allowance was however to be made for the situation and feelings of the noble baron (Grenville), by whom the explanation had been then given. The circumstances, which occasioned it, were new, and extraordinary: a mutilated extract of a cabinet minute had appeared in a public paper, even previous to the change of government; and no efforts had been spared to place the conduct of the noble baron in the most unfavourable light.—These circumstances were sufficient to account for, even if they did not fully justify, the steps which he had taken in his own vindication. But, whatever might be the cause in this particular instance, it must be admitted to be highly desirable and important, that such a proceeding should not be drawn into precedent. Some of the consequences of it already began to be seriously felt. Their lordships were now called upon to vote a resolution, founded on alledged facts, to be collected from a speech, delivered on a former occasion, of which, consistently with the privileges of that house, there could be no existing memorial;—but without any
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
The Earl of Lauderdale rose
and said:—My lords, in the course of my public life, I never heard a proposition more calmly, and decisively argued, than the proposition which has this night been submitted by my noble friend, to the consideration of this house. And never, my lords, was a mode of answer substituted, I will not only say, more unfair, but more calculated to excite unfounded prejudices, to propagate throughout the country a doctrine which must inevitably tend to produce improper feelings, and to mislead the general decision. Some noble lords have talked a great deal of conscientious scruples, and under the pretext of those scruples, they would call upon your lordships to judge of a constitutional question. Next, the noble viscount (Sidmouth) apprehends, and there-
404
405
406
407
Lord Mulgrave
observed, that notwithstanding the violent epithets used by the noble lord who had preceded him, he should discuss this question coolly on its own grounds. He contended that a resolution like the present was not to be found in any part of our Parliamentary History. He reminded their lordships of what took place in 1783, when an administration was removed; we saw then what we see now, an administration discharged, greatly dissatisfied on account of its removal. Opposition carried with it great talents, but with as little discretion as marked its conduct on the subject which was the cause of its removal: but not then as now, did such a resolution appear; nor was the king's name used so freely then as on the present occasion; and here he could not help reminding their lordships of the established rule, by which it was held disorderly to mention the king's name in a house of parliament to influence a debate.
408
409
410
411
The Earl of Limerick
lamented that Ireland was always made the scene of faction and discord, by holding out and encouraging expectations that could not be gratified while the resolution of his majesty on the Catholic question was so decidedly fixed. He expressed considerable disapprobation of the conduct of the duke of Bedford, in permitting the disturbances in the west of Ireland to spread from one district to another, till at last seven different counties were involved in disorder and tumult, and this before any means were adopted for the purpose of suppressing them. At length the judges had been sent on a circuit through that part of the country; but had they brought back the misguided men to a state of order and quiet? If his information was correct, the case was very different. He said that many of the Irish Catholics were at present disaffected, and he would wish to give them a speedy and a positive denial, as to the indulgences which they claimed, that they should no further have hopes, that they should not hereafter have any ground for complaining of hopes deferred. There had lately been upon a northern circuit some persons convicted of riotous conduct, and shortly after, eight of the witnesses were murdered. Afterwards, there were great enormities committed in Sligo, as if they meant to dare the government. What! would you give up to faction and clamour what you refuse to loyal representation? There were two cases which he could instance, where two of the most loyal gentlemen in Ireland were prosecuted; they were certainly honourably acquitted, but the judges themselves observed that they had never seen such a scandalous conspiracy against any man, as that against them was; their loyalty was supposed to be their only crime. It was a strange remedy to think of removing the discontents of the lower classes of the Catholics, by promoting the higher ranks to the top of the army. From the known fact that two regiments lately raised by gentlemen of high Catholic connection, were raised by ordinary recruiting, he
412
Lord Holland
expressed great surprise at the language which the noble earl who had just sat down had held respecting the government of Ireland and the conduct of the duke of Bedford, a lieutenant who had endeared himself to every class of his majesty's subjects in that part of the empire, and whose departure was the subject of universal regret, as his administration had been the subject of universal approbation. Though he had not the local information of the noble lord, and was connected with no factions and no factious families in Ireland, he would venture to assert that the duke of Bedford's vice-royalty was looked upon in a very different light from that in which the noble lord had placed it. And, after all, what was the amount of the charge against the duke of Bedford, and the anecdote which had been alluded to, but that the lord lieutenant had refused to listen to those, who pressed for violent and extraordinary measures to put down some disturbances which unhappily had prevailed, and persisted in employing the vigour of the law alone in maintaining and restoring the public tranquillity? Indeed, respecting the state of Ireland, different noble lords had given different views. One said that Ireland was quiet, and to bring forward any question about the Catholics was unnecessary. The noble lord who spoke last, however, said that disturbances prevailed; and seemed to censure the duke of Bedford's administration on that account. If any thing, however, more than another, recommended the conduct of the duke of Bedford to the people of Ireland and to the lovers of
413
414
415
416
417
The Earl of Westmoreland
contended that the pledge had only been demanded in consequence of the previous pledges that had been required of his majesty by the ministers. The late ministers had given a great many promises, but had done very little. They had done nothing of any consequence, either with respect to our army, our navy, our finances, or any thing else. He maintained that the system acted upon by himself and his colleagues, on all occasions, with respect to Ireland, had been one of conciliation and mercy. The late ministry, though they united "All the Talents" of the country, had realized none of their magnificent promises. The present ministers however, humble and foolish as they were, would support the king and his prerogative.
Earl Darnley
maintained that, if the late ministers had given the pledge demanded, they would have abandoned their duty, their honour, and the cause of the constitution and the country. There could be no doubt, that it was contrary to the constitution to give a pledge of this nature. It was impossible, in considering this question of pledges, not to advert to the claims of the Catholics, which had given rise to the difference between his majesty and his late ministers. He was of opinion, that the restrictions ought to be done away; but at the same time, he was convinced, that this could not be done with advantage, without the consent of the parliament and of the king. He therefore thought it imprudent at present to agitate the question at all, as it only served to keep expectation alive, which was sure to meet with disappointment. He thought there-
418
Lord Grenville
observed, that, late as the hour was, he must state, as shortly as he could, the grounds on which he would support the present motion, which must, in his opinion, be voted for by every man, unless he was contented to go away with the impression that the constitution was completely overturned. He did not say that their lordships must feel themselves bound to vote for the first part of the motion, though he was grateful to his noble friend who proposed it; but he must say, without affectation, that he regretted the dismissal of the late ministry, because they had a system in train, which was working for the best interests of the country. He said nothing of himself, but only looked at the talents of his colleagues, whose unwearied exertions and enlightened views, afforded the best hopes to the country: but if he regretted the loss which the country would sustain from their dismissal, he felt that regret doubled when he considered by whom they were succeeded. He did not mean any disrespect to them individually, but looked at their system, the grounds of their conduct, and the unconstitutional doctrines which they held. With regard to the origin of the difference between his majesty and his late ministers, he would not enter upon it, as he had stated it before, with the permission of his sovereign, and he felt it the less necessary, because that statement had not been shaken by any thing now said, though some attempts had been made, as on a former occasion, to garble and misrepresent it, by taking detached parts of it. A doubt had been expressed whether the draft of a dispatch should be laid before his majesty. He had had some experience in this way, had seen the practice of others, and consulted many documents; and therefore he could state with confidence, that it was both a common method and the best method that
419
420
421
Lord Hawkesbury
contended that the whole of the statement made by the noble baron, and of the debates to which that statement gave rise, were proceedings altogether irregular and unparliamentary. The noble baron had accused him and his colleagues of being the first set of ministers who had shrunk from responsibility, and meanly endeavoured to shelter themselves under the wings of their sovereign. He would tell that noble baron, that he and his colleagues were the first ministers who, in order to cloak their own misconduct and absurdities, had so strangely ventured to arraign the personal conduct of his majesty at their lordships' bar. He (lord Hawkesbury) had acted from a sense of duty in accepting a place in the present administration; and as long as he was conscious of acting upon such grounds, he should never shrink from the responsibility, to whatever extent it might be carried, to which his official situation made him liable. He had always been adverse to granting any further concessions to the Catholics, and even to cherishing any such hope in their minds. It was that hope which kept Ireland in a state of continual ferment and agitation, and until it was laid at rest, there would be no permanent tranquillity in that country. The Catholics of Ireland were, he was certain, perfectly grateful for the many indulgences which the whole reign of his majesty was distinguished for granting to them: and equally confident did he feel, that they would demonstrate that gratitude by their steady loyalty, and falsify the contrary prophecies, in which the noble baron seemed so much inclined to indulge.
Earl Camden rose
to reply to some allusions that had been made to his conduct, while at the head of the Irish government. The noble earl denied that he was tied by any pledge, on entering into the present administration, and concluded with giving his support to the motion for adjournment.
Earl Moira rose
to explain certain points which his noble friend (lord Grenville) had omitted, and contended that it was not in the nature of man, that the Catholics should desist from prosecuting their claims, the concession of which they conceived them-
422
The Lord Chancellor (Eldon)
agreed with his noble friend (lord Hawkesbury) in representing the present and a former discussion as wholly new, irregular, and unparliamentary. Indeed, he thought the sense of their lordships should be strongly marked to that effect on their Journals. As to the insinuations that had been personally thrown out against himself, as having been one of those who secretly advised his majesty to dismiss his late ministers, he should treat them only with the contempt they deserved. The circumstance of his having had the audience of his majesty, he had stated to the noble baron (lord Grenville), and he trusted that that noble lord was perfectly well satisfied with the sincerity of his statement. The only pledge he had given was the uniform tenour of his public life. His majesty asked no other, and he should continue to serve his sovereign to the best of his abilities, without fearing any responsibility that might attach to his official conduct.
The Duke of Norfolk
spoke in favour of the original question. After which, the question being universally called for, the house divided on the motion of lord Boringdon, that the house do now adjourn.
Contents (present)
135
Proxies
36
——
171
Non-contents (present)
69
Proxies
21
——
90
——
Majority
81
List of the Minority.
Norfolk,
Fitzwilliam,
Argyle,
Somerset,
Hardwicke,
Rawdon,
Devonshire,
Fortescue,
Somers,
Winchester,
Carnarvon,
Braybroke,
Stafford,
Rosslyn,
Grenville,
Headfort,
Lucan,
Auckland,
Derby,
Clanricard,
Upper Ossory,
Suffolk,
Leven,
Dundas,
Thanet,
Northesk,
Ellenborough,
Essex,
Elgin,
Blandford,
Scarborough,
Breadalbane,
Kinnaird,
Albemarle,
Stair,
Reay,
Jersey,
St. John,
Cawdor,
Cholmondeley,
Say and Sele,
Carrington,
Oxford,
Darnley,
Carysfort,
Tankerville,
King,
Erskine,
Bristol,
Monson,
Lauderdale,
Cowper,
Besborough,
Granard,
Stanhope,
Holland,
Crewe,
423
Ponsonby,
PROXIES.
Bolingbroke,
Cassilis,
Grafton,
Stawell,
Darlington,
St. Alban's,
Minto,
Lilford,
Bute,
Blantyre,
Grantley,
Buckingham,
Yarborough,
Mendip,
Orford,
Ashburton,
Hawke.
Guilford,
Glastonbury,
Bishops of
Spencer,
Carlisle,
Lincoln,
St. Vincent,
Bulkeley.
Landaff,
Dorchester,
PAIRED OFF.
St. Asaph,
Fife,
Berkeley,
Oxford,
Eglinton,
Leicester.
Kildare.
Anson,
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, April 13.
[MINUTES.]
New writs were ordered to be issued for the election of members for the following places: for Marlborough, in the room of the earl of Dalkeith, now lord Tynedale, called to the house of peers; for Bedwin, in the room of viscount Stopford, who had accepted the office of comptroller of his majesty's household; for Mitchell, in the room of sir Arthur Wellesley, who had accepted the office of chief secretary to the lord lieutenant of Ireland; for Eye, in the room of lord Huntley, now baron Gordon, called up to the house of peers.
[POOR-LAWS BILL.] Mr. Whitbread
in consequence of the business which was fixed for to-morrow, wished to postpone the re-committal of the bill which he had brought in on that subject, till Friday. He took that opportunity of stating, that in consequence of numerous communications which he had received, he had thought that it would be the best way to divide his original bill into three separate bills. The first of those bills would be with respect to the Poors' Fund; the second would be, for a better equalization of the county rates; and the third would contain all the remaining objects of his bill. In consequence, however, of suggestions and communications which he had received, he intended to leave out of his bill the clauses respecting the adjudication of settlements, and that for rating personal property.
Mr. Shaw Lefevre
said, that the subject was one which, perhaps, more than any other, called for a most deliberate consideration and calm discussion. After the threat that had been thrown out a few evenings ago, that parliament should be dissolved if they did not agree to this or that measure of the present administration, it was almost impossible to expect, that, in the course of the present session, or perhaps of the parliament, if that threat should be acted upon, there should be time
424
Mr. Whitbread
said, it must be, indeed, a pusillanimous parliament that would suffer itself to be deterred from the prosecution of its public duties by such a threat, which was certainly as indecent, indiscreet, and unparliamentary, as could possibly have been thrown out. That threat, however, should have no influence upon his mind. He could not see any good consequences likely to result from protracting to a later period the discussion; nor did it appear to him, that that was the most likely mode to gain for the subject the fullest degree of attention and consideration. When a discussion was put off longer than was necessary, the attention of mankind was apt to relax; whereas, if it was brought on while the subject was warm in their minds, it was likely to command more attention, and to be as well considered. He had left out many parts of the bill, in consequence of communications received from a variety of quarters, and he was happy to acknowledge publicly, the great obligations he felt to those gentlemen who had thus assisted him with their observations. He had not given up that part which related to the relaxation of the law of settlements, but that part which respected the adjudication of settlements prior to the removal of a pauper. Although he had received some opinions favourable to his original idea in that respect, yet the balance of opinions was much against it. He hoped, by yielding to those opinions, the objections to his original bill would be done away, and that considerable good would be produced by it.
425
Mr. Shaw Lefevre
begged it to be understood that, in wishing to postpone the business, he acted under no impression whatever of the description alluded to; for no threats whatever should deter him from doing his duty as an independent member of parliament.—The bill was then committed
pro formâ
[FINANCE COMMITTEE.] The Hon. J. Ward rose
to ask a question relative to a matter of the highest importance. The question related to a transaction which it was reported had taken place in the Army Pay-office, and which had been brought to light by the Committee of Finance. As the circumstance was of the greatest importance in itself, as it very much affected the individual principally concerned, and as it was a matter peculiarly fit to be taken up in that house, he hoped that some member would state, whether the report circulated on this point was or was not well founded?
Lord Henry Petty
replied, that the chairman of the finance committee was not in the house, otherwise he would probably have given such an answer to his hon. friend as would satisfy him. Yet as he had sometimes attended that committee, and particularly as he had attended it that day, he was happy to be able to give an answer to the question. He had only to state, that in the course of the examination of a Mr. Thomas, a fact had come out which the committee thought it their duty to investigate with the most scrupulous attention; and, since the discovery alluded to, the committee had accordingly been diligently engaged upon this delicate transaction, and a member of that house, who had been formerly paymaster of the forces, had been carefully examined. What the committee meant to do on this point he did not precisely know, but it was of course to be supposed that they would not dismiss the subject without a full investigation of the matter, and making such a report as their duty and the nature of the case should seem to them to require.
Mr. Ward
thanked the noble lord for the statement which he had made, and hoped that the committee would make a special report on the subject.
[BARRACK COMMISSION.] Lord Henry Petty rose
pursuant to notice, to move for the production of the treasury minute for appointing a barrack Commission, to execute the duties of the barrack-master-general.
426
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said he had no objection to the motion. On coming into office, he had found the case to be exactly as the noble lord had stated it to be. But this matter required great consideration. It appeared that it had been referred to the barrack commissioners and the comptrollers of army accounts, and they had found great difficulty in the business, and therefore it became those who were to be responsible for affixing the privy seal, to be cautious how they appointed persons to offices, and adopted all the arrangements, without an opportunity of fully considering the subject. He certainly had no desire to precipitate measures, but at the same time, the observation of the noble lord did not very well apply here, when he recommended the mature consideration of the report; for he and his colleagues had adopted the measure, before any report at all had been
427
Lord Henry Petty
in explanation said, that he and his colleagues had fully considered the subject on the report of the Commissioners, and there was this difference between the two cases, that the report was now before the house, whereas then it was not expected to be brought forward for some time.
Mr. Windham
stated, that two out of the three comptrollers of army accounts concurred in the propriety of the measure.—The motion was then agreed to.
[LOAN INTEREST BILL.]
The house having resolved itself into a committee on this bill,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said that he had no objection to the interest of the loan being secured for the present year according to the mode pointed out in the plan of the noble lord (H. Petty). He wished, however, to avoid pledging the house to approve of any part of that plan for the future. He was very ready to agree to the first object that was stated, to prevent any new taxation in the present year; he was ready to agree to the 10 per cent. which was created for the interest of the loan of the present year, and the sinking fund; but there were other parts of that very complicated system which required a more ample consideration than could be well bestowed upon it in the course of the present session. There were many objections to the principle of making permanent those taxes which were originally raised as mere war taxes, and making them the fund which was to secure the interest of the loans. He had been well informed, that a considerable degree of sensation and alarm had been excited by the idea of continuing the duties on exports and tonnage after the war, and he thought that was a part of the noble lord's plan which ought not to be persevered in. What he meant now to propose was, that the interest of the loan of this year should now remain on the war taxes as charged in the noble lord's plan; but that six months after the conclusion of peace, unless some other mode were resolved on by parliament, of securing it either by continuing the war taxes for the purpose, or by new taxes, it should then be chargeable on the surplus of the consolidated fund. He trusted, however, that the house would see that enough had already been done in the present session for providing for the interest of the loan of this year without any new taxes; and he should wish to leave the general question open for the enquiry of the house
428
Lord H. Petty
said, that if the loan of the present year were secured in the manner which had been already determined by the resolutions of that house, he could have no objection to adjourn the consideration of the general merits of the plan he had the honour to bring forward to a future time, when it might be submitted to the fullest enquiry, and to the final judgment of parliament. As to the alarm and sensation produced, if any such alarm did exist, it must have proceeded from a misunderstanding of what he had said. He had stated most expressly, that he did not wish to pledge the house to the continuance of any one of those taxes, but that he meant merely to assign that portion of the taxes, which was now represented by the war taxes, as the security of the loan; and to pledge the house only to substitute other taxes for any of those which they might resolve to discontinue. As for what taxes should be continued after the war, and what should be discontinued, he had always stated, and still was of opinion, that the return of peace would be the proper period, in which that subject should be taken into consideration
Sir T. Turton rose
to enter his protest against the plan of the noble lord, and particularly that part of it which made the income or property tax permanent. He had received a number of letters on the subject of the income tax, and he thought that—
Mr. Hobhouse
chairman of the committee, here interrupted the hon. baronet, and told him that the property tax was not mortgaged by the present bill, and had nothing to do with it.
Lord H. Petty
said, that if the hon. baronet would keep his speech for 3 or 4 years, it might possibly then apply to some question relating to the property tax.
Sir T. Turton
said, that he had no ambition to make a speech upon the subject in three or four years. However, as he now found that the property tax was not mortgaged at present, and that the loan was to be secured on the war duties on customs and excise, he felt that he could not then offer his objections to the property tax.
429
Mr. H. Thornton
objected to the principle which had been proposed by the chancellor of the exchequer, of throwing generally upon the consolidated fund a loan which had been contracted for on a different security. He thought that this was not only contrary to all precedent, but to that good faith which parliament owed to the public creditor.
Mr. Huskisson
did not think the principle so very objectionable. By the present plan, the excesses of the consolidated fund were to be applied in a manner different from their original destination, which might as well be called a breach of faith. It appeared to him that it would be giving to the public creditor an additional security.
Mr. Tierney
said, that the principle of the right hon. gent. was merely that the war taxes should be security for the interest of the loan, and that after the peace that security was no longer to be continued. There never was before an instance of any loan being secured merely on the future excesses of the consolidated fund. It had happened at different times last war, that there was no surplus, and that was a case which might again occur. Sometimes there was an actual deficiency, and in that case this would provide no security at all for the loan of the present year. He could not conceive any objection to letting the thing stand as it did at present, at least as far as regarded the loan of this year.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
would have no objection to extend the period to twelve months, after peace, instead of six; in which case parliament must meet, and would have time to decide finally on the subject. He thought nothing could be more objectionable than the principle of the present plan, which went to pledge the house to continue 9½ millions of taxes as a security for 12 millions of money. The surplus of the consolidated fund was now 3½ millions, and he thought that was a very abundant security. It certainly would be possible to avoid the pledging the whole of the war taxes, by making permanent some of the least objectionable of them.
Mr. Tierney
again protested against looking to a supposed future excess of the consolidated fund as a security. It would be entirely departing from all the principles of finance which had been established in this country. The fact now stood thus: the original bargain with the contractors for the loan was, that it was to be secured on those
430
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the public creditor was not entitled to more from the war taxes, than a security for the interest of the loan, and for the sinking fund created. As to charging loans on the surplus of the consolidated fund, it was not so extraordinary as had been represented. The chancellor of the exchequer of Ireland (sir John Newport) had charged any deficiency in the product of the sugar tax upon the surplus of the Irish consolidated fund.
Mr. Tierney
said, the arguments of the right hon., for he could no more call him the learned, gent., were such as could not be excused in a man who had been five days chancellor of the exchequer. If he were appealed to as a lawyer, he could not argue that it would be better for his client to have one security than two, and that if he already had two, it would be doing him no injury to take away one of them. There never was an instance of any loan charged upon the consolidated fund without making some increase to it by taxes. If the right hon. gent. would assign 1,200,000
l
Sir John Newport
stated, that the difference in the case of the Irish loan was, that it was secured upon annual, and not upon permanent taxes.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that no absurdity could, in practice, be greater than that of assigning a portion only of the war taxes for the loan. It would be impossible to tell the collectors of the customs or excise, that they must stop collecting the taxes when they had got so much money. He did not, however, now wish to press his amendment, if it did not meet the sense of the house; but it appeared to him that the house had an undoubted right to substitute the security of the consolidated fund for that of any particular taxes
Lord H. Petty
said, that, in the present case, there was no substitution at all. The
431
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, April 14
[MINUTES.]
A ballot took place for a committee to determine the merits of the petition complaining of an undue election for Westminster; the following members compose the committee:—W. Tuffnell, esq. sir C. W. Bamfylde, sir Jacob H. Astley, lord Porchester, T. Foley, esq. sir H. D. Hamilton, bart. N. Sneyd, esq. G. Campbell, esq sir L. Palke, bart. W. Lushington, esq. A. Hamilton, esq. W. Honeywood, esq. G. Colclough, esq.; nominees, Edward Morris, esq. sir John Doyle. The petitioner having waved his right to appoint a nominee, Mr. Morris was chosen, pursuant to the provisions of the act, by the thirteen members remaining on the reduced list.
[LOAN INTEREST BILL.]
The house resolved itself into a committee on the Loan Interest bill.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that in compliance with the suggestion thrown out yesterday by the right hon. gent. opposite (Mr. Tierney), he should not press upon the committee the amendment he had at first intended to propose to the noble lord's plan; at the same time, he could not see how that amendment could have by any possibility given rise to any alarm in the public mind, and furnished any pretext for charging parliament with a breach of public faith in that instance.
Lord H. Petty
admitted that it would not have been a substantial breach of faith, inasmuch as the war taxes on customs would have supplied a sufficient surplus, but at the same time contended, that it was anominal breach of public faith, and being totally unnecessary, would be much better let alone, if the ambition of the new chancellor of the exchequer did not prompt him to have some change or other in the plan; to gratify therefore the right hon. gent., he
432
Mr. Tierney
said, that the new chancellor of the exchequer entertained the newest financial doctrines he had ever heard. The right hon. gent.'s argument went to say, that the consolidated fund was as productive without as with the war taxes. He fancied, however, that the right hon. gent. would have found the plain plodding understanding of the city quite averse to the subtle genius of the right hon. gent. He denied that the intended improvement was given up as an act of grace to his side of the house, for the right hon. gent. while he was driven to an abandonment of it, would fain have the house to understand that he had volunteered in abandoning it.—After a short conversation, the amendment was agreed to. The other amendments were then read and agreed to. After which, the house resumed, and the report was ordered to be received to-morrow.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, April 15.
[MINUTES.]
After the names of defaulters on the two last ballots were called over, on the motion of the chancellor of the exchequer, it was ordered, that the members who should be absent at the ballot and call of the house the following day, without a sufficient excuse being assigned, should be taken into the custody of the serjeant at arms.—Mr. White then delivered in at the bar the names of the members remaining on the reduced list of the East Looe election committee, which were as follow: lord John Campbell, hon. Edw. Finch, sir J. Frederick; W. M'Dowall, esq. F. B. Foljambe, esq. Robert Cartwright, esq. lord Lismoie, G. Longman, esq. W. Tighe, esq. Price, esq. A. Campbell, esq. C. P. Leslie, esq. sir R. Barclay; nominees, W. Jacob, esq. Hiley Addington, esq.
[CHANGE OF ADMINISTRATION.] The hon. W. H. Lyttleton rose
and said, that in prefacing the resolution which he should do himself the honour to move, he would avoid, as much as possible, a repetition of any of the topics that were urged on the important and memorable debate of Thursday last, although so much extraneous matter had on that evening been introduced, that it would be difficult completely to steer clear of such a repetition. On the question that had been then discussed, he
433
434
435
Mr. Hibbert rose
to second the motion. Although he had, in the measure regarding the slave trade, uniformly opposed the late administration, yet he was happy in now giving them a proof of his sincere approbation of their general conduct. His hon. friend had given a comprehensive view of the grounds on which the resolution was founded. He presumed that whatever difference of opinion there might be on some subjects, there was no disagreement as to the state of alarm in the present crisis of public affairs. To assert such a proposition, was to procure immediate conviction of its truth. A noble lord on the other side (lord Castlereagh) had said, that the late ministers ascended a bed of roses when they entered into power; but he did no think, now they occupied the same place themselves, they would persevere in that sentiment. If now they should be incommoded by fewer thorns, it would be because some had been extracted by the diligence of the late administration. These were
436
437
438
439
Mr. Milnes
in a maiden speech, opposed the motion. Although the question and the observations to which it had given rise, extended to the detail of all the acts of the late administration, it ought yet to be recollected that most of those acts had before been singly considered and approved of by the house. Before he proceeded he would make one observation on the form of the resolution, which did not appear to him to be calculated to include in the concurrence to it all those whom the hon mover must certainly be desirous to include. It contained this proposition, that because the late administration might in many points have deserved well of the country, yet that their dismissal was not expedient or necessary. Did it follow that, because the house, or any member of the house, had approved of part of the conduct of the late ministers, they must necessarily extend their approbation to that part of their conduct which occasioned their dismissal? Certainly not; and the hon. mover must therefore forfeit the support of those who, while they applauded the late ministry in several points of their administration, were not disposed to give to that administration their unqualified approbation. He would not, on this occasion, go into an examination of the merits of the late administration, or of the circumstances which led to their dismissal. A particular review of their public acts, few as they had been, it would require more than one night to accomplish, and a general review might be productive
440
441
The Hon. John W. Ward rose
and spoke as follows:—I can assure the house, sir, that it is not without considerable reluctance that I rise for the purpose of occupying any portion of their time, however small. But as the question now before us
442
443
444
445
446
victory
447
448
449
450
Mr. Hawkins Browne
did not think that any ground had been afforded by the present ministers, in consequence of any act of theirs, for a remonstrance against them. They had all served his majesty before the present time with fidelity, why then should they be stigmatised by anticipation? they had given proofs of talent, and fully justified the favourable opinion entertained of them on former occasions; was it fair, then, to dismiss them now without a trial? He had great respect for the late ministers; but their successors certainly did not yield to them in public spirit, integrity, or virtue, and were superior to them in constitutional feelings and conduct. The late ministers meant well, he had no doubt, but they proceeded sometimes to extremes, He felt astonished at the panegyric pronounced on them for financial economy and financial system; but the house would recollect, that the whole merit of their plan should be attributed to Mr. Pitt. It was his sinking fund which enabled the late administration to form those arrangements respecting finance for which they claimed the thanks of the country. The present chancellor of the
451
Mr. Macdonald
could not refrain from returning thanks to the hon. mover, for the opportunity which he afforded him of expressing his opinion of the integrity and meritorious conduct of the late ministers. This would be an easy task, and might be done in a few words; but under the circumstances of the country at this moment, the question could not rest here, for it involved the public interest and public opinion which should be regarded, notwithstanding the menaces of a dissolution of parliament The house would feel that this was a moment of the greatest anxiety in every point of view. We were engaged in a most expensive war against the most formidable enemy this country had ever encountered; it was a moment at which our great northern ally was looking towards us for support and confidence; it was a juncture at which the eyes of Europe were turned to our situation Under these circumstances, what was so necessary as that we should be all united heart and hand, in the great cause we had undertaken? What more desirable than a firm, determined, efficient government, capable of calling forth our resources, and directing them against the enemy? The late ministers had done all in their power to promote the interest, and maintain the honour of the country.
Mr. Tighe
felt it to be his duty, as belonging to that part of the empire where the dismissal of the late ministry was a subject of deep and universal regret, to state his opinion on the question before the house. In whatever light he viewed the conduct of that administration during the short time
452
453
Mr. Robinson
said that when the hon. gent. attacked the measure of the union between the two countries, he seemed to overlook the consideration, that the noble lord (Grenville) Who was at the head of the late government, was one of the persons most forward in carrying that measure into effect. He felt sorry he could not assent to the motion of his hon. friend; a motion which he had introduced in a manner creditable to himself; and there was no man in the house more ready to give credit to his motives than he was. There were some points on which he could not feel inclined to support the late administration. In their military measures, he could see nothing but speculative plans and fallacious hopes. They had totally and completely ruined the volunteer system, by their inattention and disregard; and there was left no moral possibility of now ascertaining the discipline and force of that establishment. The next point on which he could not support them, was, their conduct relative to the catholic question. In his opinion they had imprudently encouraged expectations which they could not gratify, and were now predicting evil consequences, which he did not think the circumstances warranted. He thought the house might fairly expect, that the government of the duke of Richmond would be as popular and as lenient as that of lord Hardwicke. The late ministerial changes he regretted upon general grounds; yet still he could not accede to the proposition of condemning their successors by anticipation, and much less, when he recollected the peculiar circumstances under which they were called to the councils of their sovereign.
Mr. Gore
said, he had the honour of being a representative of a great and populous county in the sister island. Some months back, every thing was peaceable, and the people well affected; within the last month, no less than four murders had taken place, and a number of individuals had been arrested for treasonable practices. He trusted, that when the present ministers should retire from office, the house and the country would not be obliged to witness similar proofs of their policy and measures. The bill which opened the military service to the Catholics, had his warmest support; a support which he would have continued, had the late ministers persisted in carrying
454
"Long from a nation, ever hardly us'd, At random censur'd, wantonly abus'd, Have Britons drawn their strength."
Mr. Roscoe
began with considering the great and important good consequences that must have resulted from the adoptions of any measure that went, in the present crisis, to conciliate the people of Ireland, and to the truth of such a principle he required no stronger testimony than that of the hon. gent. who had just sat down. As to the bill in its original form, he could not conceive what objection could be urged against doing that in those times, when the idea of a Popish ascendancy was laughed at, which was done when such a motion was really formidable. He could not for his part understand the distinction which had been attempted to be set up between the subjects of the king of these realms. His majesty, no doubt, expected allegiance from each and every of his subjects; it was but reasonable that each of those subjects
455
Sir John Newport
rose and spoke to the following effect:—it was my intention, Mr. speaker, to have immediately replied to the observations of the hon. gent. who spoke last but one. I felt anxious to have commented on some statements which fell from him, with a view of answering those charges which he attempted to insinuate against the late servants of the crown. If upon those charges I shall be able to do what I think I shall, then do I trust for his vote, then do I call upon him to support those very measures, the supposed non-performance of which he has, this night, stated to be the
456
457
458
459
460
Mr. Bankes
said he was a friend to the suppression of abuses, whether in Ireland or in England, and for suppressing abuses he was ready to give his thanks to the hon.
461
462
Mr. Tierney
said, that the hon. gent. who had spoken with so much eloquence and ability (Mr. Milnes), comprised the whole substance of his speech against the motion in one sentence, that it was sufficient for the house to know that the king had dismissed his late ministers. For his part he thought it necessary to know a great deal more. When so extraordinary and unexpected a change had taken place, it was proper for the house to enquire, what were the circumstances that led to it, and what was likely to be the result? The hon. gent. complained, with others, that the king's name was dragged before the house, but he must again repeat, that this was to be attributed solely to the new ministers. There was a time when, in discussing any public measure, members of the house could animadvert upon the king's advisers, but now, for the first time, it was said that the king had no advisers. Who, then, was it that brought the king's name into question, but those who declared that he acted without advice? If such a doctrine as this were to prevail, the character of public men was no longer safe; but when made the victims of intrigue, and their character brought into suspicion, they were not to have the privilege of defending themselves, because the secret advisers of the king shrunk from responsibility, and threw upon the king himself those measures they admitted to be unconstitutional. The interested advisers of the king threw upon the king that which they were afraid to avow; and he took God to witness, that he conscientiously believed that the removal of the late ministers was the result of a long and dark intrigue. The hon. gent. who spoke last had, however, expressed his astonishment
463
464
465
466
467
Lord Castlereagh
said, it would not be necessary for him to argue at great length, after the very able speeches that had been made on the same side. He should be content to put the matter to the decision of the house, upon the single speech of his hon. friend (Mr. Milnes). He utterly denied that his majesty's ministers had been the cause of introducing the king's name and personal character so much into the present debate. The introduction of it in this manner was a novelty, from which he apprehended serious consequences to the constitution. The introduction of it, however, became necessary from the conduct of gentlemen on the other side of the house. The noble lord (Howick) had thought it due to his own character to come down to the house, and make a statement for the vindication of his conduct, which contained several confidential transactions between him and his majesty, that would otherwise not have been known to the house. That noble lord had pledged himself to the house to make that statement, even before he had obtained his majesty's permission for that purpose; but when the permission was obtained, and the statement made, it became necessary that a statement should be made on the other side; and therefore the blame of introducing his majesty's name and personal character into the debate, rested with those who went out of their way to make formal statement to the house, which was by no means called for. Before that statement, his majesty's late ministers, or some of them, gave the minutes of the cabinet to persons who were not of the cabinet nor even of the privy council. This appeared to him a high crime and misdemeanour. The present ministers were therefore obliged to apply the antidote to the bane. As
468
469
470
471
Lord Howick
denied that the late ministers had been deserving of the numerous charges which the noble lord had brought against them. The first person appointed by them to go out to India, as governor-general, was the earl of Lauderdale, a nobleman in every respect highly qualified to fill that high and important station, but against whom an opposition was raised, perhaps by the influence of the noble lord himself, and others who still retained an influence; and so far from forcing the directors, that appointment was given up, and a nobleman, who had since gone out, had been appointed, against whom no opposition had been made. He complained of the unconstitutional use made of the king's name, and insisted that nothing had been said by the late ministers that required the introduction of it; for they had admitted there had been a misunderstanding, and it had been consented to, that that misunderstanding was imputable to them; there was, therefore, no reason for using the king's name. Then came the pledge, which was proposed and refused. He had stated over and over again, that such pledge was unconstitutional, and the arguments had been admitted by the whole house. What was this pledge? Why, that his majesty's confidential servants should undertake in writing not only to abstain from bringing forward the Catholic question, but that they should not mention any thing connected with it. The present ministers, who are the legal advisers of the king, say they did not advise this measure, but that it was the king's own act, than which declaration nothing could be more unconstitutional, for they by that threw the whole upon the king, and they only are therefore to be blamed for introducing his sacred name into the present and late debate. If it were allowed that one act might take place without advisers, others might do the same; and in such case all responsibility would be at an end, and his majesty would be as arbitrary as any monarch in Europe. The noble lord had by his letter, written under the sanction of Mr. Pitt, assured the Catholics, that if they would be patient, their case should be duly attended to, and every possible means used that it might ultimately be crowned with success; for that he and Mr. Pitt would do every thing in their power to recommend it to the public.—The noble lord had also attacked the late ministers for having
472
Mr. Bathurst
opposed the motion, expressing at the same time his regret, that the late ministers should have been removed, and his entire, approbation of every part of their conduct, with the exception of that only which led to their removal: disapproving of that part, he could not consistently support a motion which implied an unqualified approval of all their measures. But he had another and a stronger objection to this motion, and that was, as he had stated on a former evening, in discussing a proposition of a similar character, that it would serve to put a negative upon the exercise of his majesty's undoubted prerogative, in choosing his own ministers.
Earl Percy rose
to express his approbation of the original motion. The measures brought forward by his majesty's late ministers, he could not but in general approve of. The act for the abolition of the slave trade, which had so lately passed, and the appointment of a committee for the reduction of
473
The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Perceval)
combated the notion, that the removal of the late ministers was the effect on a long and dark intrigue. If so, he contended that the evil spirit which conducted it, must have found its way into the minds on lord Grenville and his noble colleague on the other side, and have urged them to press forward the bill which was the immediate and obvious cause of their removal. The right hon. gent. also resisted the doctrine maintained by the supporters of the motion as to the idea that those ministers who accepted office were legally responsible for the change which led to the vacancies they occupied. He put the case of ministers being dismissed even from caprice, and asked whether other men were to refuse to succeed them, and the government was to stop merely under the notion of this responsibility? As to the notice taken of his address to his constituents, he begged it to be understood, that he did not by any means mean it as an election squib, as had been stated; for the sentiments which it contained were those which he really held. But so far from those sentiments serving to raise any dangerous outcry, he maintained that the danger was created by the proceedings of the gentlemen on the other side, and that the course which he took of resisting them was the best means of averting that danger. This, he thought, should appear to the gentlemen themselves, from the spirit which manifested itself throughout the country; a spirit, indeed, which could not be excited by any thing in the
474
Mr. Windham
entered his protest against the doctrines which the house had heard from the other side, upon the question of responsibility. If, indeed, these doctrines were to obtain; if it were allowed that the king could exercise his prerogative without an adviser in one case, so he might in another. His majesty might make his
veto
The Master of the Rolls
was for the motion for passing to the order of the day. Many ministers had been dismissed from office without any cause assigned, but never until now had a minister come down to parliament to complain of his sovereign. Lord Somers was removed without the shadow of complaint. Did he come down to parliament to institute an investigation of the cause? When the celebrated Whig administration were removed by queen Anne, did they breathe a whisper against their royal mistress in either house of parliament? If a minister were to secure to himself the right of enquiring into the cause of his removal, he would approximate his situation to that of a judge, or any other
475
For passing to the order of the day
244
Against it
198
Majority in favour of ministers
46
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, April 16.
[CAPTURE OF MONTE VIDEO.] Lord Hawkesbury rose
pursuant to notice, to move the Thanks of the house to brigadier-general sir S. Auchmuty, for the capture of Monte Video. On some former occasions, he said, doubts had been entertained by the house, whether the thanks of the house ought to be given in cases where important captures were made with little or no resistance on the part of the enemy. In the present case, however, in whatever point of view the achievement was considered, there could be no possible doubt, in his opinion, that it ought to be rewarded with the thanks of the house. The thanks of that house constituted an highly valuable and greatly valued reward, which encouraged the living and afforded the greatest consolation to the relations of those who fell. The brave exertions of the British troops, and the skill and valour of the officers, displayed in the capture of Monte Video, eminently deserved, in his opinion, that reward. The particulars of this capture had already been published. It appeared from this account, that two actions had been fought, in which the British troops had been victorious, and that subsequently Monte Video was carried by assault, after encountering and overcoming the greatest difficulties, with a spirit and a bravery deserving of the highest praise. This gallant achievement was of the greatest impor-
476
The Earl of Galloway
thought it necessary to call the attention of the house to one or two points connected with this subject. The brave achievement which the thanks of the house were called for, deserved, in his opinion, the highest praise, and he rejoiced to hear the noble secretary of state come forward in the way he had, to move for those thanks.
Lord Mulgrave
after a warm panegyric
nem. diss.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, April 16.
[CAPTURE OF MONTE VIDEO.] Lord Castlereagh rose
pursuant to notice, to call the attention of the house to the brilliant and important services rendered by his majesty's forces in the Capture of Monte Video. It was impossible that a person in his situation could feel any duty more agreeable, than doing this justice to the services performed by his majesty's forces. Nothing could be more grateful to the feelings of a person so situated, than to find, that in all the variety of opinions that prevailed on all other subjects, party feeling was entirely laid asleep on subjects of this kind, and only one spirit of emulation who should be most prompt to pay the tribute of gratitude and applause, prevailed in every bosom. He was sure he could say of one individual on the opposite side (Mr. Windham), that whatever difference of opinion
477
478
Sir John Doyle and Mr. Windham rose
together. Sir John Doyle having given way,
Mr. Windham
said, that after the forcible manner in which the noble lord had conveyed the general feeling, he felt it rather a trespass on the house to offer any thing further. He could not pretend to any share in the glory of the brilliant achievement now under the consideration of the house, merely for his being in the office of secretary of state for the war department when the expedition was fitted out. But having turned his mind particularly to the outset and the operations of this expedition, he felt a natural disposition to say a few words on the occasion. He was sure the noble lord Opposite did not feel less warmly upon the success of the expedition than if he had himself fitted it out. The noble lord would do him the justice to say, that he had felt no less warmly when it had fallen to him to discharge a debt of the same kind on succeeding the noble lord in moving the vote of thanks for the victory of Maida. He agreed with the noble lord in his observations on all the details of the achievement now under consideration. In every one of those details there was a particular claim to the gratitude of the country. The achievement, considered altogether; was one of the highest in the highest class of military services. The circumstances that attended it, called for particular notice. The fortress was strong beyond what had been calculated. It was impossible
479
Sir John Doyle
said, if he had been pertinacious in offering himself to the house at the same time with the right hon. gent., he hoped it would be a sufficient excuse to state, first, that he did not see the right hon. gent., and secondly, he hoped he should be forgiven if he shewed a little tenacity in pressing his claim to the attention of the house, when he mentioned that one of the regiments particularly engaged on this glorious occasion (the 87th), he had himsel
480
Mr. M. Matthew
commended the hon. general, for the particular notice he had taken of the 87th regiment. It was true, that regiment, led on by a gallant friend of his, had distinguished itself particularly in the assault. But what the hon. general might have added, and what he was sorry he had omitted, was, that that regiment to a man was composed of Roman Catholics. It was also a fact that 3 of the 4 thousand men composing the expedition, were Catholics. Who after this could say that Catholics were not to be trusted with arms? Whoever would say so, was ungrateful, and the worst enemy of the country.—The thanks were then voted to brigadier-general Lumley, and to the officers and men; and also to admiral Stirling, for his distinguished skill and ability in effecting the landing; to the captains and officers of the fleet for their co-operation, and to the seamen and marines. It was ordered that the votes should be communicated by the Speaker to sir S. Auchmuty and Admiral Stirling.—After a few words from sir T. Turton and others, the votes were severally agreed to
nem. con.
481
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, April 17.
[SCOTCH JUDICATURE BILL.]—Lord Kinnaird rose
to acquaint their lordships, that it was his intention to move that the lord president and the two senior judges of the court of session be ordered to attend.
The Duke of Montrose
moved, as an amendment, that the following words be added, "and be admitted within the body of this house."
The Earl of Lauderdale
wished the noble lords to recollect, that the order of the house which commanded the attendance of the lord president and the senior judges, also extended to such other judges as were able to attend. It so happened, that there were some other judges of that court in town, and therefore be thought it necessary that the present motion should embrace that part of the case.—The motion so amended was put and carried; and the chairman was ordered to report the proceedings to the house forthwith. The house having resumed, lord Walsingham reported the decision of the committee.
The Duke of Montrose
argued in favour of the right of the Scotch judges to be admitted within the body of the house. At all times it was a great and wise measure of policy, to hold in reverence and estimation, those learned persons to whom was entrusted the dispensation of the laws. But the judges of Scotland had a claim from the usages and customs of the Scottish parliament; as, previous to the union, they, on all occasions, were entitled to take their seats in that assembly. Under such circumstances, he conceived that the judges of the court of session, independent of all personal feelings, were right in supporting what they supposed the privilege of their body; and, with that conviction, he was induced to submit the motion he made in the committee, "that they be admitted within the body of the house."
The Lord Chancellor
trusted the house would believe, that there was not amongst their lordships an individual who entertained for the judicial character a higher reverence than he did; but, at the same time, he felt convinced, that no legal right existed by which the judges, either of Ireland or Scotland, were entitled to seats within the body of the house. At the period when a learned judge (Fox) from Ireland was placed below the bar of the house, he was seriously grieved; but he still must contend, that the deci-
482
Lord Auckland
was of opinion, that as it was the general sense of the house, that the judges of Ireland and Scotland had no legal right to the privilege, he could not see the necessity of any legislative interference. He was inclined to consider such interference rather as an innovation of a most dangerous tendency.
Lord Hawkesbury
contended, that the noble baron did not put the suggestion of his noble and learned friend, in a fair point of view. If the judges of Scotland had now no right, surely it was not an improper measure, which would impart to the judicial character, both in Ireland and Scotland, that privilege. There was one great difference, at least it had so struck him, in a comparison between the right of the Scotch and Irish judges. The Irish judges were called to parliament by the summons of the king; and, of course, when that summons ceased, their right to a seat within the body of the house was annulled. But the judges of Scotland sat in the Scottish parliament, by immemorial usage; and the motion of his noble friend went to allow them that which they had enjoyed in their national legislature. He only stated these facts for the consideration of the house, and not with any view of giving a decisive opinion.
Lord Holland
expressed his willingness to support the bill to which the noble lord alluded, and which went to grant to the judges of Scotland and Ireland, the right of sitting within the body of the house. At the same time, he must insist, that the precedent in the case of Judge Fox was conclusive against the present claim of the judges of the court of session in Scotland. He felt the force of the objection, even to the intended bill, inasmuch as it went to make an appearance at the bar of the house, a matter of degradation, and a subject of reproach. It was to be recollected, that some of the most respected characters in the history of the country, were often examined at that bar; and, therefore, he could not see that the cause of jealousy, in the Scotch judges, was at all warranted. That learned body stated a va-
483
fortiori
Lord Melville
deprecated the elaborate at-
484
Lord Hawkesbury
thought it would be the most convenient mode for him to communicate to the committee his ideas upon the subject, previous to moving any particular amendment, the different parts of the bill being intimately connected, and the amendments which he should move being those which arose out of his general view of the measure He admitted that a great evil existed in the number of appeals to that house from Scotland, and that a remedy ought to be applied, but he disliked going further than the remedying that evil required. He approved of the division of the court of session, but thought that instead of three chambers it would be much preferable to have only two chambers, consisting of eight judges and seven; the lord president being in one chamber, and the lord justice clerk in the other. There was another principle also highly important, with a view to diminish the number of appeals to that house, and which had not been touched upon in this bill, namely, to give power to the chambers to award possession to the party in whose favour the decision had turned. This, he was convinced, would prevent a great number of appeals to that house, many of which, it was well known, were only made up for the purpose of delay. With respect to the proposed court of review, it was the opinion of many persons well informed on the subject, that it would only be an additional stage in the progress of litigation, and would not prevent any appeals to that house. To the court of review, as pro-
485
Lord Grenville
contended, that it was incumbent upon the noble lord to give some reason for his proposed division of the court of session into two instead of three chambers; at present he had given none, except that it was his opinion. Experience in this country was in favour of three courts, with a few judges in each, and all theory on the subject pointed out the expediency of having the smaller in preference to the greater number of judges. He had, when he first proposed this measure, not thought it advise-able that the number of the judges of the Court of session should be reduced, but if the proposition for two chambers was persisted in, he should then contend that the number of judges ought to be reduced, inasmuch as five judges would be amply sufficient for each chamber. The noble lord had somewhat unfairly charged the late ministers with having only in view the creation of a new office in the establishment of the court of review; but if the division into two chambers was to be persisted in, and the number of judges not reduced, the truth would be, that noble lords on the other side were continuing five useless and unnecessary offices. With respect to the proposed court of review, when that subject came fairly under discussion, he would undertake to prove to their lordships, that it
486
Lord Hawkesbury
in explanation, said that he had not argued against the establishment of juries, but as to the principle of unanimity.
Lord Grenville
resumed, and again expressed his astonishment that the noble lord should object to that which the experience of ages had sanctioned in this country, and proved to be highly beneficial. He was not surprised, however, that to the minds to whose consideration this measure now devolved, and with the advice now likely to be taken upon the subject, that the difficulties in the way of the establishment of trial by jury, in civil cases in Scotland, should appear so insuperable. He thought a most extraordinary principle had been advanced by the noble lord, as the foundation of his opinions upon this subject; for it amounted to this, that in remedying a great evil we should not look to any enlarged theory, but should do as little as possible. He contended that it still remained for the noble lord to state his reasons for the alteration he proposed.
The Lord Chancellor
coincided in opinion with his noble friend, as to the division of the court of session into two chambers, because he did conceive it would fully answer the object required. With respect to the number of Scotch appeals presented to that house, he conceived the best remedy to consist in affixing large costs to those which were presented on improper and untenable grounds. The house was aware that until such a remedy was adopted, it would be impossible to check an evil which was supported by the parties who, brought forward those appeals, as well by the profit arising from the interest of money, as the benefit of possession. He fully coincided in the opinion with the late lord Mansfield, that it
487
Lord Grenville
replied, that he saw nothing in the noble and learned lord's observations, but an opinion without any solid argument.
Lord Erskine
supported, the principle of the bill in all its branches, and thought it exceedingly strange, that the introduction of trial by jury, generally, into Scotland, should be matter of such extreme apprehension and caution, particularly as it was already partially known and valued in that country, as the source of all the blessings of liberty enjoyed in this. He observed an illustrious personage, on the other side of the house (the duke of Cumberland) smile, and he must be bold to tell him such a smile was inconsistent with the decorum with which that house was in the habit of hearing every noble lord express his sentiments; but it was particularly indecorous and indecent in that illustrious personage to smile at a panegyric upon the trial by jury. Trial by Jury was the means of placing the present family upon the throne of England, and trial by jury had preserved our most gracious sovereign, that illustrious person's father, throughout his long and glorious reign. Trial by jury was the best security for the freedom of that house; and he should never cease to feel and know, that Trial by Jury enabled him to address their lordships upon equal terms with the highest man among them.
Lord Redesdale
coincided in opinion with his noble and learned friend (lord Eldon) that the bill in its present state would be a violation of the act of union, and totally unnecessary; but if such a measure should be found necessary, he thought it first ought to undergo the investigation of a commission of inquiry.
Lord Holland
expressed a hope that the noble and learned lord who spoke last, and who had acknowledged that he had been often induced to change his opinion, upon various subjects, had now from conviction, changed that prejudice and opinion, he had some time since entertained, with respect to one-fourth of his majesty's subjects, he meant the Roman catholics. An opinion and prejudice most disgraceful to this country, in the eyes of every enlightened nation on the globe.
Lord Melville
entered at large into the nature and object of the proposed change. He did-not see the benefits which the noble baron was so sanguine as to expect from the measure. It was, in his mind, an innova-
488
Lord Kinnaird
could not contemplate, without surprise, the conduct of noble lords relative to this measure. They had taken advantage of the late ministerial. changes, totally to new-model the object and detail of the system so ably proposed by his noble friend, and so long desired by Scotland. Such conduct went to mock the expectations of the people of Scotland, and to cheat them of their hopes.
The Earl of Lauderdale rose
to oppose the intention of the noble lords, in trying to take an advantage of the house, and in proposing to a committee, in the form of an amendment, a measure altogether new in its principles. Such conduct was a violation of the privileges, and a complete disregard of the opinion of the people; that opinion which his noble friend, who first introduced the measure, had used every means fully to acquire and understand. The noble viscount (Melville) had talked of innovations Every remedy for an existing evil, was throughout the whole period of his administration for that country, considered by him as an innovation. But was it a measure to promote a system of jobbing and of favouritism, it would have fully accorded with his views. He thought the noble lords ought to be ashamed of attempting to pass such a juggle on the house.
Lord Auckland
stated, that notwithstanding the very extensive information that he had heard communicated upon this subject from both sides of the house, be confessed that his mind was not sufficiently informed as to how far this measure might be considered to affect the administration of justice in that part of the island to which it was directed. He had listened attentively with the hope that some noble lord might so far enlighten his mind, and set his doubts upon this point at rest. However, as he was disappointed in this respect, he must beg leave to solicit the assistance of some noble lord, as to how he should now proceed in order to obtain the opinion of the judges on this subject.
489
Lord Hawkesbury
expressed his regret that the noble lord had not thought of suggesting his desire to obtain further information at an earlier hour.
Lord Auckland
repeated, that he had hoped to have heard the legality of the question placed beyond all doubt by one of the learned lords on the other side of the house. The judges, however, were at hand, and might easily be called in, if it was their lordships' pleasure. [A call of move! move! from the treasury bench.] His lordship accordingly moved, that the judges be now called in.—Upon which lord Hawkesbury and the lord chancellor suggesting the great inconvenience that would result from commencing such an inquiry at that late hour, it was agreed, at half after two o'clock in the morning, that the subject should be resumed on Monday next.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, April 17.
[MINUTES.]
Lord Robert Seymour, from the select committee appointed to try and determine the merits of the petition of Henry Allan, Deacon of the Fleshers of the city of Edinburgh, and one of the persons having right to vote in the election of a member for the city of Edinburgh, complaining of an undue election and return for the said city, informed the house, that the said committee had determined, that sir Patrick Murray was duly elected, and that the said petition appeared to the said committee to be frivolous and vexatious.—Lord Temple called the attention of the house to a circumstance, of which he had yesterday given notice. He was glad to see the noble lord in his place, and was sure that noble lord would satisfy the house why when he had obtained leave of absence on the plea of a sick certificate, he had been told upon the division the other morning. Lord Henniker said, that the certificate alluded to by the noble lord had obtained him exemption merely from sitting on election committees. It was a particular certificate, not a general one; he threw himself upon the indulgence of the house. Lord Temple said, that as the explanation just made to the house must have been deemed satisfactory by the noble lord, he should persist no further in the business.—Mr. Huskisson, in a committee of supply, moved the following sums: Three millions, for paying off outstanding exchequer bills for the year 1806; 1,500,000l. for ditto; 139, 138l. loyalty loan; 10,306l. to the Swedish convoy; and also that provision be
490
[POOR, LAWS BILL.]—Mr. Whitbread
moved the order of the day for the house going into a committee upon this bill, and that it be an instruction to the committee to divide it into two or more bills as they may think fit. Previous to going into the committee, however, he thought it would be proper to say a few words explanatory of his intentions in regard to the bill, he had originally had the honour to introduce, as several gentlemen were not present upon a late occasion, when he briefly stated them. In consequence of intimations he had received from different parts of the country, of the opposition it was likely to meet with in certain points, he had thought it best to propose the division of and the abandonment of some portions of it. He intended, for instance, to abandon, 1st, that part of it which gives the power of requiring a previous adjudication of settlements. 2dly, that relative to the vestries, in so far as it gave two or more votes to persons possessed of large property in the parish. 3dly, that relative to the declaration of the assessments of stock in trade and personal property. After abandoning these parts of the original bill, he should propose to divide the remainder of it into four separate bills. The first of these would relate to education only; the second comprehend the relaxation of the law of settlements, by a residence for a certain number of years in certain parishes; vestries to be held at certain times, and notice to be given thereof. He meant to press upon the consideration of the house, the power of exempting cottagers, under a certain amount of income, from being included in the poor's rates, upon their own request; and the power of giving rewards to labourers under certain very limited circumstances, and also to repeal a part of the 9
th
491
Mr. Curwen
commenced his speech with a handsome eulogium on the purity of the motives which actuated the hon. gent. but said he was sorry to add, that from many of that hon. gent.'s views upon this subject he materially differed. The hon. mover, in introducing this bill, had drawn a comparison between the Scotch and the English poor: he, for his part, could see no analogy whatever. He strongly deprecated the present system of poor-rates, and thought that it called loudly for parliamentary interference. The burden of the poor-rates on the middling orders was almost intolerable. He did not think that the proposed bill went in any way to alleviate that burthen. On the contrary, he contended that if the relaxation that was proposed was adopted, it would increase the poor-rates twofold; instead of their being three millions, they would be then six millions. Besides, it was to be recollected that the poor required immediate remedy; and even admitting that to be a remedy which was proposed, it was a most distant one. To the principle of funding he also objected. He did not think that the poor could fund, and even if they did it would encourage idleness. The plan of education he thought too expensive, and the system of building cottages and adjudging them to different tenants, would be productive of endless contention. He thought the corn acts of Mr. Pitt every way entitled to a preference, and though not in the habit of approving of that right hon. gent.'s administration, he felt it but justice to say, that his measures on this subject reflected the highest honour on his memory. He concluded with stating, that the poor-rates at present bore severely upon a deserving and industrious set of people: the lower orders of shopkeepers in England.
Mr. Plumer
approved highly of the sys-
492
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
suggested the propriety of letting the bill go into the committee, in order that the hon mover might have an opportunity of bringing it out of the committee in the form in which he wished to submit his measures to the consideration of the house. This Would divide the consideration of the complicated question, and save a great deal of observation. After this proceeding, he hoped the hon. member would have no objection to give the house an opportunity of considering each of the distinct bills, by consenting to their re-commitment.
Mr. Fellowes
said, that as the hon. gent. had signified his intention of letting two of the four hills lie over till next session; he thought it would be very adviseable in him to postpone the four bills, until they had been submitted to the cool and deliberate consideration of the country.
Mr. Patteson
took occasion no observe, that since he had presented a petition from Norwich, against one of the clauses contained in the original bill, he had been informed by the hon. mover that the nature of that clause had been entirely misunderstood by the petitioners.
Mr. Fuller
wished to see distinctly the whole extent of the plan proposed by the hon. gent. and, to give time for mature deliberation, he wished the measure to stand over to another session.
Mr. Davies Giddy
was fearful, lest, whilst endeavouring to remedy partial evils, more serious ones might be introduced, and particularly animadverted on that part of the bill for building cottages.
Mr. Parnell
in allusion to what had fallen from an hon. gent. respecting Mr. Pitt's Corn acts, adverted to the great advantage derived by Ireland from the Corn Intercourse act, passed by the late ministry, who had always paid so much attention to the interests of Ireland.
Sir Ralph Milbanke
observed, that the present system of poor laws was a bad one, and that something ought to be done to re-
493
Mr. Shaw Le Fevre
would not oppose the committal of the bill, but he wished to know whether it was intended to abandon for the present the equalization of the county rates, as there was a bill now before the house for the equalization of the rates in Kent, which might be stopt, if the thing should be done by this bill.
Mr. Whitbread
said, that he would endeavour to shew that the object of his hon. friend (Mr. Curwen) for stopping the accumulation of the poor rates immediately, was chimerical. It was very fine in language, but how was it to be done? As to the equalization of the county rates, he would wish to go on with it at present, and if he should abandon it for the present, it should be only in consequence of the opinion of others.
Mr. Windham
would not object to the committal of the bill, but he had such serious objections to the greater part of it, that he thought it would be better to postpone the measure till next session.—The Speaker left the chair, and Mr Hobhouse stated that the best way would be to read first, all the clauses that were to form the first bill, postponing the rest, and so on, with regard to the four bills into which it was intended to divide the present bill, find to negative such clauses as were not to be passed this session.
Mr. Wilberforce
proposed that his hon. friend (Mr. Whitbread) should be allowed to proceed to form his four bills for the present, and that each should be re-committed, when they might be discussed.—Mr. Simeon, Mr. Fellowes, and Mr. Pole Carew, wished the bills not to be pressed this session, as the house would not have an opportunity of discussing them in all their stages, usually allowed for discussion on bills of importance, the bill having already gone through some of its stages.
Mr Bathurst
observed, that when each bill came on, gentlemen would have an opportunity of urging what they should think necessary.—The proposition of Mr. Wilberforce was at length agreed to. Mr. Whitbread presented his four bills. The house resumed, and the whole were reported.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, April 20.
[SCOTCH JUDICATURE BILL.] Lord Auckland
494
The Lord Chancellor
thought the noble baron fully competent to decide, both on the manner and the matter of examining the Scotch Judges. With respect to the inconsistency and want of fairness attributed to those who supported the proposed amendments, he should only for himself say, that he never pledged himself to any further support, than a bare admission, that some alteration was necessary in the manner of administering civil justice in Scotland. Whether the present bill was rejected or not, he was not prepared to say what line of conduct he would pursue; whether, in the first case, he would propose any new measure; but he would certainly, if the house went into a committee, follow up his own opinion, by proposing and supporting such amendments, as to him appeared correct and advantageous.
Lord Grenville
would not desert his duty and opinions, although other noble lords were careless in the performance of the one, and the recollection of the other. Whatever might be the fate of the bill which he had the honour to propose, he would continue to support its principle and provisions; and he trusted, for the credit of the house, that it would not suffer a measure to drop, to which, scarce a month ago, it gave the most unanimous support.
Lord Howkesbury
denied that the proposal for dividing the court of session into two chambers, instead of three, as originally proposed, was any violation of the principle of the bill, and therefore was a just and correct object for amendment.
Lord Kinnaird
contended that the amend-
495
Lord Lauderdale
took a survey of the different opinions expressed respecting the merits of the bill, and contended that not only a majority, but that of the best informed men in Scotland, had given it their approbation.
The Lord Chancellor
in explanation, said, that he would propose a motion which might bring the matter to issue. It was now his intention to move; that the committee be deferred till Thursday next, that their lordships might have time to make up their minds upon the subject, and that then he might take the sense of the house upon it, and afterwards, if necessary, move, that the committee be postponed for three weeks, for the purpose of allowing time to prepare another bill.
The Duke of Athol
suggested the propriety of discharging the order for the attendance of the Scotch judges.
Lord Melville
took up the suggestion and gave notice that on Thursday next he should move, that the order for the attendance of the Scotch judges be discharged.
Lord Lauderdale
was exceedingly surprised at this motion; and asked, if it was thought necessary to move for the attendance of the Scotch judges, upon a bill, the whole of which had been submitted for a full year to all those persons in Scotland who were most competent to form an opinion of its merits, how much more so must it not be necessary to have the opinion of the Scotch judges upon a bill, of the nature of which nothing at all had as yet transpired?—The proposition of the lord chancellor was then agreed to: the house resolved itself into a committee, pro forma, and it was next ordered that the committee do sit again on Thursday.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, April 20.
[MINUTES.] Mr. Whitbread
presented a petition from W. C. Lindsey, esq. of the county of Tyrone, in Ireland, of whom he had not the least knowledge; but was a petition complaining of a grievance which was alleged to exist, and praying for relief: he therefore thought it his duty to present it to the house. The petition being read at the table, appeared to state a number of loyal actions performed by the petitioner in Ireland, which brought on the total ruin of his
496
[MUTINY AT VELLORE.] Mr. Howarth
said, he thought it his duty to call the attention of the house to the late dreadful mutiny at Vellore; a mutiny, he had every reason to think, had been occasioned by an ill-timed military measure, tending to violate some of the customs of the natives. He wished to put a question to a right hon. gent. opposite, as president of the board of controul, and, according to the answer he should receive, he should, perhaps, think it his duty to found a motion upon this subject, he wished to know whether, in consequence of the accounts received from Madras, any steps had been taken, either to remove those persons who were so obnoxious to the natives, or to attempt to conciliate those who were so much irritated?
Mr. R. S. Dundas
as president of the board of controul, answered, that he could assure the hon. gent., that the subject to which he alluded had been matter of serious consideration with the board of controul. Previous to the appointment of the present board, the court of directors did make a resolution as to the changes that were to take place in the Madras establishment. With regard to the causes of that unfortunate mutiny, he could only say, that during the very few days since the present board had been appointed, it was impossible that they could have made up their minds, or that they could ascertain that any dissatisfaction did actually still exist. The board having been so employed, no delay would take plate in adopting whatever steps might be judged necessary.
Mr. Corry
said, that, as the question was one which deserved the most serious consideration, he should think it would be advisable to delay adopting any measures, till the arrival of an officer, whom he knew to be upon his passage from India to this country. The officer he alluded to was sir John Craddock, who, from his situation at Madras, had had an opportunity of investigating the whole affair; and who, therefore, would be able to state the particulars with
497
[IRISH CHURCHES AND GLEBE HOUSES.] Mr. Wickham
in rising to make a motion on this subject, observed, that the papers on the table would shew the necessity of parliamentary interference, by larger and more liberal grants for the relief of the protestant church in Ireland. In 1803, he had laid on the table of the house a paper for the purpose of rousing their attention to this subject. Two bills were subsequently passed; one for the loan, without interest, of a large sum from the Board of First Fruits; the other for the advance of £50,000 by the lord lieutenant. On these bills, however, no steps had been taken. Entering into a comparative statement of the population of the two countries, he asserted, that the population of Ireland was half that of South Britain; but that the number of parishes in South Britain exceeded 10,000; while in Ireland the number of parishes was originally only 2436, and, by subsequent consolidations, was in the year 1791 reduced to 1120. This reduction was highly injurious to the protestant interest; and it appeared that, in the late troubles in Ireland, rebellion raged most violently, and most succesfully, in those districts in which the reduction had been the greatest. Having dwelt on the great importance of this subject, he concluded by moving, "That a select committee be appointed to take into consideration the several acts of parliament relating to the building, rebuilding, and keeping in repair, churches and glebe houses in Ireland, and to the purchase of glebe houses and lands there, and requiring certain returns to be made concerning the sufficiency state of, and condition, of such churches, for the regular performance of divine service therein; together with the several reports and papers relating thereto, and to the unions of parishes, that were laid before this house in the years 1803 and 1806 respectively; and that they do consider the said acts and papers, and examine how far the said acts, or any of them, have been found inadequate, and in what respect, for the purposes thereby intended; and do report the same together with their observations and opinion thereupon, to the house."
Dr. Duigenan
said he would not oppose the motion of the right hon. gent. but he contended that the poverty of the people was so great in many places, that if it were not for the union of the parishes, the clergy would have devoured the people. Besides
498
Sir John Newport
said, that many erroneous calculations had gone forth as to the actual number of inhabitants in Ireland. The number as laid down by Mr. Bushe, in the Irish Philosophical Transactions, amounted to upwards of four millions. Although the lords lieutenant of Ireland had the power of disuniting parishes, he had not found any instance in which they had done so. The state of the protestant church of Ireland did require the attention of the house, and he was sure they could not bestow their labours better than in discussing such an inquiry.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he should certainly forward the object of the motion. He believed the money directed to be applied for the benefit of the church, by the acts in 1803, had never been properly applied. Many of the unions had been directed the privy council, on account of some of the parishes not being adequate to the maintenance of a clergyman. The proposed inquiry, therefore, appeared to be one of the most useful acts the house could engage in. One object on this side of the water had been to secure the residence of the clergy, but such an object could not be aimed at in Ireland, till such time as they had parsonage houses to reside in.
Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald
stated, that, to his knowledge, some of the livings in the South of Ireland amounted to £1000, to £1500, and some even to £3000 a-year; and also
499
Mr. Parnell
thought, that the house ought to be put in possession of circumstances so material as those hinted at by the hon. gent. The population of Ireland, as computed by Mr. Bushe, amounted in the year 1788 to 4,080,000 inhabitants; the population of England and Wales, as the
Census
data
[IRISH GRAND JURY PRESENTMENTS.] Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald rose
pursuant to notice, to move for leave to bring in a bill to alter and amend the mode of levying money by Grand Juries, in Ireland. He could now state, from the return on the table, that the enormous sum of half a million was raised by the grand juries, for bridges and cross-roads, exclusive of turnpike-roads, and the main lines of communication between the different parts of Ireland. This sum might not appear great compared with the revenue of England; but it was prodigious when compared with that of Ireland. The hon. gent. went on to state, that a land-tax would be an unpopular measure in Ireland, and yet that country was in reality subject to a land-tax, raised in the most objectionable way. The poor in Ireland were, of necessity, obliged to have some land, and after, by extraordinary industry, raising subsistence out of it, they were obliged to pay their tythes, and then their Grand Jury Tax, which fell upon the poor occupants; while the rich proprietor, being absent, payed none of the tax as a proprietor. What he proposed, therefore, was, to follow up the analogy of the regulation adopted by his right hon. friend (sir J. Newport), who had exempted from the house tax those whose rents did not exceed 61. per annum. He intended also to propose some new regulations with respect to presentments and the
500
The Chancellor
of the Exchequer had no objection to the bill proposed by the hon. gent. The course of proceeding with respect to the bill, as suggested by the hon. gent., he thought altogether unexceptionable, he rose for the purpose of deprecating for himself, and those connected with him, the supposition of their being disposed to intercept the prayers of any part of his majesty's subjects in their way to the royal ear, or to the presence of parliament, however his sentiments might differ from those of the right hon. gent. on some subjects connected with a large portion of the people of Ireland. He thought it right also to offer himself to the house, lest, if he should have sat silent while the Union was represented as a barren and useless thing, as a thing, the continuance of which was problematical, and its dissolution a thing seriously contemplated, lest such things, suffered to pass uncontradicted, should give rise to false and dangerous opinions abroad. The interests of the two countries were now so intimately combined, that a dissolution of the Union could not be contemplated without involving most material injury to both, however some matters of detail might, in the opinion of some,
501
Mr. Parnell
defended his hon. friend who might well be warranted in doubting of the policy of the Union, when the Imperial parliament was made the scene of disseminating religions dissentions, instead of diffusing, as had been promised by the authors of the union, political rights, by the extinction of religious divisions.
Mr. Wilberforce
had listened with great satisfaction to the statements of the hon. mover, because he had thrown some light upon the situation of the Irish poor. He wished that the gentlemen from Ireland would always endeavour to enlighten the house with regard to the internal state of that country. This would be much more important with respect to the poor of that country than the discussion of any great political privileges. Dr. Mc. Nevin, one of the persons who had been engaged in the rebellion, had stated in answer to a question put to him, when examined before a committee of the Irish house of commons, that the peasantry would not give the value of the ink in the pen with which the clerk was writing, for emancipation. The real happiness of the people depended more on the nature of their connection with their landholders and tytheholders, than upon those privileges. One of the best effects which he hoped for from the Union was the additional light which it would enable us to procure with respect to the situation of the people of Ireland. If Irish gentlemen, and members of parliament, would study and point out measures, calculated to promote the internal comfort and prosperity of Ireland, they would do far more real service to their country, than by recriminating upon those who could not hazard the strong measures they might wish. Whatever difference of opinion there might be as to higher questions of policy, all, he trusted, would concur in endeavouring to promote the reformation of the abuses in that country; and with this view, he wished it to be considered, whether it might not be possible for the voluntary exertions of the great landholders themselves to correct these abuses?
Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald
begged leave to give an accurate and entire statement of the circumstance to which the hon. gent. had just adverted. This he could do with the most perfect correctness, as he had been a member of the Irish Committee. The question asked was, "what value the great body of the Catholics attached to what was
502
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, April 21.
[CAPTURE OF MONTE VIDEO.]—The Earl of Moira
rose, to call the attention of the house to certain observations and erroneous reports that had been sent abroad respecting a deficiency in the quantum of ammunition with which the troops were furnished in the attack on Monte Video. Nothing could be more cruel and mischievous than the dissemination of such rumours, without any concomitant explanation to account for the circumstance they alluded to. What must the soldiers feel, if they were taught to believe that they were sent into the field to encounter all its dangers, and expose their lives, without being provided with the usual and adequate means that might render their valour efficacious, and give them an equality of chance with the enemy? So far from that being the case, he believed he might venture to assert, that so far from the troops being left without a due proportion of ammunition, he was pretty certain, that a some-what greater proportion of ammunition than what had been allotted to a similar service (the capture of the Cape of Good Hope),
503
The Earl of Galloway
conceived himself to be somewhat the cause of the observations thrown out by the noble lord who spoke last. It was true, that he had animadverted on the deficiency of ammunition under which the brave troops laboured who had so gallantly stormed Monte Video. In making that observation he had rather in view to reflect additional lustre on that achievement, than to aim any attack by a side wind, or otherwise, on the late administration. No doubt, the inevitable inference from his remarks was a censure so far on the late ministry, but he did not single out any department of that government, much less any individual, as the peculiar object of his animadversion. If, however, the cap seemed to fit the noble earl, it was for that noble earl further to explain himself: he certainly was surprised that any noble lord, who belonged to the late administration, could have so far let himself down as to justify his conduct by squeezing it upon that of his predecessors in office, whom it was the constant study and practice of the late administration to disparage and decry in the public estimation.
Earl Spencer
defended the character of the late ministry, and observed, that the noble earl (Galloway) should have waited the return to the motion, before he proceeded to animadvert upon the conduct of the late government. For his own part, he never disparaged the merits of the capture of the Cape of Good Hope; on the contrary, he was among those, who valued that possession much higher than any, perhaps, of the present ministry.
The Earl of Moira
in explanation, observed, that the deficiency of ammunition, alluded to in the dispatches, was not owing
504
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, April 21.
[MINUTES.]
—On the motion of lord Porchester, it was ordered, that Drake, who was confined in Newgate under an order of the house, should be brought up to-morrow, to give evidence before the committee on the Westminster Election Petition.—Mr. White presented at the bar the following list of the committee chosen to try the merits of the Petition complaining of an undue return for Aberdeenshire: Tho. Bernard, R. Dawson, D. Jephson, sir J. B. Warren, John Patteson, Scrope Bernard, W. Taylor, D. S. Dugdale, lord Headley, E. Baillie, sir C. Hawkins, lord John Thynne.—Nominees, H. Erskine, sir J. Montgomery.
[PENRYN ELECTION—SIR C. HAWKINS.]—Mr. A. Wright
moved the further consideration of the report of the committee upon the Penryn Election, which being read accordingly, and also the order for the attendance of sir Christopher Hawkins,
The Speaker
stated, according to the custom in similar cases, that then was the time for the hon. bart. to deliver his sentiments upon the subject of the charge advanced against him.
Sir C. Hawkins
being present in his place, said, he should leave his case entirely to the justice and liberality of the house, and then withdrew.
Mr. A. Wright
said, that nothing was more remote from his wishes than to hurt the feelings of the hon. baronet in question. The proceeding he was about to take, was not matter of option but of duty. The parties in the Penryn election were strangers to him. The situation he had the honour to hold on the committee was the sole cause why he called the attention of the house to the transactions contained in the report. The report contained ample grounds for the motions he
505
506
Captain Herbert
had hoped that he should have had abler assistance in the defence of the hon. baronet and that he should not have been left to manage the whole case by himself, inadequate as he was to such a task He had particularly to lament the absence of an eminent gentleman of the law (sir A. Pigot), on whose support the hon. baronet particularly relied. Some important affidavits also were expected.
Sir W. W. Wynne
thought the house ought to be cautious of procrastination. A threat of dissolution had been thrown out, and reports to that effect were very current. If therefore, the house wished to mark its sense of the offences contained in the report now under its consideration, it ought to do so before it should be bereft of the power by the execution of the unparliamentary menace he referred to.
Mr. Lee Keck said
that as a member of the committee alluded to, he was convinced that there never was a stronger case made out for the consideration of the house, and it became them, consistently with their, dignity, to come to an immediate determination thereon. He looked upon the proceedings by the Attorney-General as the most moderate course that could possibly be adopted, under the circumstances of the case. The Committee had shown every disposition of leaning towards the accused; and, therefore, instead of proceeding further of their own accord, had made it the subject of a special report. If the house should be of opinion that any suspension of procedure should take place, he should bow with deference to their determination; but as a member of that committee, he protested against any suspension whatever.
Mr. Hurst
did not see the case in so strong a light as the honourable member; and in a case in which the feelings and the character of one of its Members were so touch called in question, the house was called upon to give every possible facility to the defence.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
suggested, that the house could take no affidavits into account, and that his hon. and learned friend, who had been alluded to, could probably attend without inconvenience to-morrow.
Mr. Bankes
wished to know from the hon. mover, whether there was any precedent for an instruction to the attorney general, to prosecute in a case of this kind; he had himself inquired, and he believed there was no precedent for such an instruction, without some further proceeding.
Mr. Wright
was not aware that there was
507
HOUSE OF LORDS
Wednesday, April 22.
[SCOTCH JUDICATURE BILL.]—Lord Erskine
took a brief retrospect of the proceedings hitherto had relative to the Scotch Judicature Bill, and observed that he considered it of importance, previous to the motion of his noble and learned friend on the woolsack, for rejecting the present bill, that certain questions should be put to the Scotch Judges, the answers to which might perhaps give a new turn to the opinion of the house. It was his wish, if the house should agree to these questions being put, that the Judges should be treated with all that respect which the house shewed towards the Judges of England, and that they should be allowed such time as they might think necessary to answer them. He therefore gave notice, that he should to-morrow move to put certain questions to the Scotch Judges in attendance; and concluded by moving, that the lord president and two senior Judges of the Court of Session, and such other Judges of that Court as may be in town, should attend the house to-morrow.—Ordered.
Lord Grenville
stated, that he had been summoned to attend a committee of the house of commons as a witness. Their lordships were aware, that there was a standing order which prohibited lords of parliament from attending the house of commons, or any committee thereof, without the permission of the house. If however, the house would give him permission he had no objection to attend.—The Lord Chancellor moved, that the noble lord have permission to attend. Ordered.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, April 22.
[GOVERNOR OF CURACOA.]—Colonel Wood
moved, that there be laid before the house a copy of the letter of admiral Dacres to the lords commissioners of the admiralty, dated 8th Jan. 1807, inclosing a letter from captain Brisbane, dated Jan. 1. 1807, communicating the intelligence of the capture of the island of Curacoa. The hon. colonel, on being reminded by the Speaker, that it was usual for hon. members, when moving for public papers, to state the ground upon which they called for them, declared that it was with a view to an inqui-
508
Mr. Windham
thought the motion objectionable, because no parliamentary ground had been laid for it. The usual course on the capture of any enemy's settlement was to appoint a provisional governor, until his majesty's pleasure should be taken upon the subject, and a governor appointed under the sign manual. Captain Brisbane had been appointed the temporary governor, as sir David Baird had at the Cape, and as had been the case at the capture of the Cape, last war, for certainly lord Macartney had not been the conqueror of the Cape. If the hon. colonel should ask why captain Brisbane had not been continued in the government, he had only to answer, because another had been appointed. It would be for the house to determine, whether the hon. gentleman's motion should be entertained on this ground, and after what they had heard lately of interference with the king's prerogative, he did not think the house would go into an inquiry, why his majesty had thought proper to appoint this or that person governor of that Island. If the person who had been appointed, was not qualified for the office, either by his profession or his services, the house might inquire. It would be a bad rule in general that the person who conquered an Island should be continued in the government of it. The man who made a musical instrument was not always the best to play upon it. There was, however, another question to be considered, whether Captain Brisbane himself would have liked that office? as an active command was thought generally preferable to the government of an Island. But it was for the house to decide whether the motion should be agreed to, or not.
Lord Castlereagh
felt himself involved in considerable difficulty by the motion of the hon. Colonel. The house would be sensible that there was no instance of the exercise of the royal prerogative in which they ought so little to interfere, as the appointment of his officers by his Majesty. Many of the officers who had achieved conquests, had attracted particularly the attention of the crown, and were continued in the government of the settlements they conquered. But that was not a general or an absolute rule. As, therefore, the hon. colonel had not stated as the ground of his motion, that the per-
509
Colonel Wood
said, he had brought forward his motion only in defence of the rights of a gallant officer, who had great claims upon his country. He did not mean in the smallest degree to object to the gentleman who had been appointed; but as it appeared to be the sense of the house, that the motion should not be entertained, he had no difficulty in withdrawing it, at the same time observing, that it would be more for the interest of the country, that ministers should appoint persons of high claims to such offices, rather than provide for their own connections.
[THIRD MILITARY REPORT]—Lord A Hamilton rose
and, in allusion to a notice which he had given upon a former day, of a motion on the subject of the Third Report of the Commissioners of Military Enquiry, respecting the case of Mr. Alexander Davison, he now begged to ask the right honourable the chancellor of the exchequer, whether any proceedings had yet been taken by government, in consequence of that part of the report? or whether it was the intention of his majesty's present government to follow up that business in the same spirit as their predecessors?
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
informed the noble lord, that no change whatever had taken place in the proceedings or intentions of government upon that subject; but he understood it was the intention of the preceding government that some further enquiry should take place previous to the commencement of any process, civil or military, thereon. He had felt it his own duty to make some enquiry as to the further proceedings which had since taken place, and he found that no diligence or exertion had been wanting on the part of those to whom that subject was referred, towards bringing it to a speedy issue.
[PENRYN ELECTION—SIR C. HAWKINS.]—Mr. Atkins Wright
moved the order of the day for resuming the adjourned debate upon the Special Report of the Penryn Election Committee.
The Speaker
stated, that the question in
510
Captain Herbert rose
He said he was disposed to allow the special report of a committee every due weight and authority; but was of opinion, that the house had the right to inquire into and discuss the grounds of that report. If a special report were final, then the first proceeding of the house would be to order a prosecution. But the house, on the contrary, ordered the minutes of the evidence to be laid on the table, in order to examine whether the report was borne out by that evidence. It was for the house to consider, whether the mortification of the person concerned, and the penalties to which he was subject, were not sufficient punishment without any further prosecution. Besides, unless the evidence were such, as to be satisfactory to the minds of a jury, the question ought not to be sent into a criminal court, because the acquittal by a jury, would take from the weight of a decision by a committee of that house. The hon. gent. then proceeded to comment upon various parts of the evidence to shew that the hon. bart. had not been intentionally guilty. He shewed that the evidence of Stona and Moon was contradictory with respect to the agreement, and that there was no evidence whatever that could be made the ground of a decision in a court of law. There was no proof of any agreement, or that any agreement had been acted upon: and he put it to the house whether, upon this doubtful evidence, they would, by agreeing to the resolution, prejudge a question that was to go to a jury. It was not unusual with the house to pass over special reports of committees, for instance, in the Berwick and Cricklade cases. And upon these grounds he moved an amendment, that the debate be adjourned to this day three months.
Lord A. Hamilton
had attended particularly to the evidence for the last five weeks, and declared the impression upon his mind to be the very reverse of that stated by his hon. friend. This appeared to him one of the strongest cases that had ever been brought before parliament. He had served upon many committees, and knew the scrupulousness with which their reports were
511
Captain Herbert
in explanation, asserted that he was authorised to state, that no agreement existed at the late election, and declared upon his honour, after every inquiry he could make, that no such agreement existed at that election.
Mr. Lee Keck
argued from the evidence, to shew, that the report of the committee was fully borne out by it. He did not think it just or fair, that the hon. baronet, because he had secured his seat for another place, should be in a different situation from others under similar circumstances, because so far as Penryn was concerned, he was no longer a member of that house.
Mr. E. Stewart
contended that the house had delegated its powers to the committee, and that it had then only to determine what proceeding it should adopt upon the report. One fact was certain, that the hon. baronet had agreed to give 24 guineas to each voter, and the gentlemen who had read the minutes would agree that this was one of the grossest instances of barefaced bribery that had ever been brought under the consideration of parliament.
Mr. Hurst
explained the reasons that governed his conduct, both in the committee and since. He considered the evidence with reference to the criminal law of the country. The proceedings upon that evidence might be for the expulsion of the hon. baronet, or for a criminal prosecution, and before they should determine upon either, he thought the house ought to consider whether the evidence was such as to bear it out. The evidence of Stona and Moon was contradictory, and if he were to decide, he should say, that neither was to be believed; concluding therefrom that no agreement existed. He had no knowledge of the hon. baronet until after the report of the committee, when in a conversation he had with him, that hon. baronet had declared to him upon his honour, that no agreement was ever entered into by him.
Sir W. W. Wynne
said, that whatever sir C. Hawkins might deny, still, as his agent (who must be considered as an unwilling witness,) had admitted it upon his oath, he could not but believe that there was such an
512
Mr. Windham
said, that he knew nothing more of the present matter than what he had heard and read in the course of this evening's discussion. He thought that too much had been said on the subject of purifying the house in the estimation of the country. We ought always to be actuated by such a motive, but the great object should be first to know our duty, and then to pursue it. Such language seemed rather to suggest, that some victim should be sacrificed for the reputation of the rest. He lamented that the house had not seen reason to hear the indirect evidence which an hon. member had proposed to introduce. He wished then to lay aside all extrinsic considerations; and concluded with saying, that he would not vote at all on the question, not feeling competent to decide upon it.
Mr. Whitbread
professed, that he was not in the same situation with his right hon. friend. He had examined the evidence with the utmost attention, and thought the case perfectly clear. But this was not the time to enter into the evidence. The committee appointed by the house had come to a decision, and the house were now to determine whether their resolution should be adopted. They were not calling for a victim, and it was material to come to a decision, for if it was not come to now, it would not come to it at all. What would the country think, should the house blink the present question, and say, in effect, that the offending member shall not be punished?
Mr. Rose
had read the report with attention, and thought the resolution of the committee well warranted by facts. He conceived the house were in the situation of a grand jury, and fully warranted by the evidence to send the matter to a special jury in a court of justice, where it would be tried with perfect impartiality.
513
Mr. Simeon
did not think the discussion ought to be deferred.
Mr. Lethbridge
thought that there were grounds for putting the hon. member on his trial, though the opinion of this house was not binding in any other court.—The previous question was then put and negatived.—A discussion then arose on the original question.
Mr. Simeon
thought the resolution was not founded on evidence sufficiently clear. He observed that there had been corrupt practices, but he did not think that actual bribery had been proved. He drew a distinction between agreeing to bribe, which he thought had been proved, and actual bribery which he thought had not been proved. In support of this opinion, he commented at considerable length on the evidence in the report of the committee.
Mr. Leycester
argued also at considerable length from the evidence, from which he drew an opposite conclusion, and considered that bribery had been made out.
Mr. Hurst
repeated his former arguments, and added, that giving the pound notes instead of a dinner could not be considered as bribery.
Mr. Swann
(member for Penryn)
declared, that he never heard of such an agreement, at the time he joined his interest with sir Christopher, and if he had believed that there was such an agreement, he would not have joined him. He would state for himself, and for 162 freemen of Penryn, who voted for him, that they knew of no such agreement, and if they had, they would not have given sir Christopher their independent votes. [A laugh.] He knew the town of Penryn well: they had never asked from him even a single solitary shilling, and he knew they were not corrupt. [A laugh.] As for the business of the one pound notes, it was this: he had always considered it necessary to follow an old custom, which, perhaps, would be "more honoured in the breach than in the observance," of shewing some attention to his constituents. Instead, however, of opening public houses, he found that it was less expensive
514
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
thought the house must feel, that after the report of their select committee, they were bound to take some proceedings on it, and order a prosecution. It did appear to him, that there was upon the face of the report sufficient evidence to justify the resolution that the committee had come to. He preferred a prosecution to expulsion, as it appeared to him a little unfair that he should be first punished by expulsion, and then sent to a trial, where, perhaps, he might be acquitted. If he had been returned for but one place, the house could have done nothing more than order a prosecution.
Mr. Bankes
said, there was no instance on the Journals of a member being ordered to be prosecuted, and yet allowed to keep his seat. He instanced the cases of Mr. J. Ridge, in the reign of queen Anne; Mr. Carnagie, in the year 1715; and sir A. Grant, who had all been expelled from the house, and afterwards ordered to be prosecuted. The Shepherds, father and son, were expelled and prosecuted for bribery, in the year 1700. If sir Christopher had been returned for but one place, the report of the committee would have immediately deprived him of his seat; and he did not think that he should be in a better situation, because he had been returned for three places.
Mr. Fuller
was sorry to differ from the hon. gent. who spoke last; but he thought that nothing was fairer than to send the member to another tribunal, and the house might afterwards act upon its decision.
Sir W. W. Wynne
thought that when a committee had reported any member, of that house to be guilty of bribery, he should be no longer permitted to sit among them.
Mr. S. Bourne
thought, that the house ought not both to inflict the punishment of expulsion, and order a prosecution. He much preferred the latter course, and thought that if he were found guilty upon a trial in a court of justice, his expulsion from that house would be merely a matter of course.
Mr. Whitbread
said, that he could easily conceive a case, although he would not say that this was that case, where a person might be acquitted in a court of justice, and yet where the house of commons might be so convinced of his criminality, as to think it necessary to expel him. In the present instance, however, he was for the prosecution.—The gallery was then cleared, but we understood that the resolution of the committee
515
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, April 23.
[SCOTCH JUDICATURE BILL.]
The order having been read for the attendance of the lord president and other judges of the court of session, five of the judges of that court, namely, the lord president, the lord justice clerk, lords Glenlee, Cullen, and Newton entered the house, and took their seats in chairs provided for them in a space inclosed without the bar.
Lord Erskine
then addressed their lordships on the important subject under consideration, the end and object of which was a considerable improvement in the administration of civil justice in Scotland. His lordship took a review of the proceedings which had taken place in the present and in the last session, in reference to the bill now pending before their lordships, and noticed the general admission that evils did exist in some parts of the administration of the Scots laws, which were even felt to affect that house in its appellant jurisdiction, and for all which a speedy and efficacious remedy was declared to be necessary. For these objects, he held the bill brought in by his
516
517
Lord Grenville
made a few observations, importing, that the whole of these should be considered as referring to, and arising out of the measure he had the honour to propose. There was no other bill before the house, no other measure could therefore be regularly adverted to. He deprecated the idea of the least ground existing for an apprehension that any thing proposed would overturn the court of session, or clash with the articles of union.
The Duke of Athol
felt it incumbent on him to allude to the situation in which the law lords of Scotland were then placed in that house, and expressed his wish that the learned lord's proposed bill for placing the Scots and Irish judges on an equality in these respects, were brought in; and which he seemed to think might be passed before it would be necessary for them to deliver their answers.
The Lord Chancellor
deprecated every idea that the situation in which those respected personages then stood, was in the smallest degree disgraceful, and adverted to the impracticability of getting such a bill through, as hinted by the noble lord.—The question was then put, and the remaining queries were ordered to be put to the Scots judges.
The Lord Chancellor
then inquired of these learned judges as to the time at which they could conveniently give their answers.
The Lord President
replied, that for his own part, he had no objection to answer the queries forthwith, if such were the pleasure Of the house; but his learned brothers might think differently; perhaps tomorrow, or Monday might therefore be more convenient. He wished permission from the house to offer a few observations to their lordships. [A general cry of go on! go on!] The lord president was then entering upon some degree of detail; upon which, the lord chancellor informed him he must confine himself to the subject of the ques-
518
The Lord Chancellor
stated, that the rule was, that the reasonings upon which the opinions were founded should be delivered
viva voce
[LOAN INTEREST BILL.] The house having resolved itself into a committee on the Loan Interest bill,
Lord Auckland
said, that the general purport of the bill was necessary towards the due execution of the great finance measure brought forward by the late government. That measure had provided an extraordinary annual supply of 32 millions, during an indefinite continuance of the present war, and had assigned, for the liquidation of that supply, certain proportions of the war duties in a revolving series of 14 years; and also certain excesses of the sinking fund. This important object would be attained with a strict regard to the public faith, and without any new taxes or new burthens for the first 3 years, nor for any subsequent years, except to a small and imperceptible amount. But the new ministers had made a change in the bill as handed over to them by their predecessors, and to that change he wished to call their lordship's attention. Their lordships would recollect, that in the year 1797 recourse was first had, by the pre-eminent minister of that day, to the principle of raising a considerable portion of the war-supplies within the year. That principle was pursued in the convoy-duties, the treble-assessed taxes, and the income tax. In 1802, on the return of peace, Mr. Addington (now lord Sidmouth) found the income tax charged with 56 millions, and an unfunded debt of 40 millions. The noble lord took the bold resolution to fund the whole 96 millions, and to provide permanent taxes to pay the interest. It was a resolution dictated by a judicious, provident, and energetic policy. When the war broke out again in the following year, the noble lord reverted to Mr. Pitt's system of raising a large proportion of the war-expenditure
519
520
521
The Duke of Montrose
thought it necessary to say but a very few words upon the subject. He had nothing to do with any cry that had been raised against the late ministers, and he should therefore confine himself to the amendment in the bill to which the noble lord objected. It was well known to those acquainted with the subject, that during a period of war a great quantity of tonnage was employed by government, and that on a peace taking place all this tonnage being thrown out of this employ, there was for 2 or 3 years a greater quantity of tonnage than could find a market. It was therefore of great importance to release the tonnage at a period of peace from the war duty, and it was with this view that it had been taken out of the pledge as originally contained in the bill. The security left to the public creditor was amply sufficient in the duties which remained pledged, and therefore he did not see that there was any well founded objection to the alteration in the bill.
Lord Sidmouth
went over the financial plans of his own administration, of the administration which succeeded, and the principal points of the plan of the late ministers, of which he highly approved. He also approved of the conduct of the present ministers, with respect to the disposition which they shewed to carry into effect the plan of the late ministers. With respect to the alteration which had been made in the present bill, he thought it had better not have been made, but as it only nominally altered the nature of the security pledged to the public creditor, leaving in fact an amply sufficient security, he thought there was no material objection to it.
Lord Kinnaird
commented strongly upon the absence of ministers on the discussion of a question of considerable importance on a former evening, and upon the continued
522
Lord Mulgrave
defended the alteration in the bill, and commented upon the pernicious effects of the system of Necker in France. He did not mean to apply this to the plan of the late ministers, but it was necessary in point of principle, that these things should be adverted to. The public creditor was amply secured under the bill as it now stood.
Lord Grenville
said, be differed from the noble lord on the cross-bench (Sidmouth), with respect to the disposition of the present ministry to carry into effect the financial plan of the late ministers. He, on the contrary, thought they had shewn a disposition to frustrate, and as far as possible, render it nugatory. The present measure, it should be recollected, was only a very small part of that plan; and he much feared that they would not have to discuss the remaining parts in that house. Much had been said and written, to prove that the late ministers might have easily raised taxes to provide for loans; and it had been charged against them, that they had only brought forward taxes which their predecessors had rejected. Some of those, however, who made such charges must know, that Mr. Pitt, in 1805, found it impassible to raise more than 400,000l. by new taxes, without resorting to 10 per cent. on the assessed taxes. In like manner, the late ministers found themselves equally incapable, in 1806, of raising more than 400,000l. by new taxes, without also resorting to 10 per cent. on the assessed taxes. It was, however, evident, that the assessed taxes could not be carried any further; and, under this difficulty, the late ministers had to consider of a plan by which the war might be carried on with all the energies of the country, and without imposing any additional burdens, or, at least, if they were, that they should be of trifling amount. The only effective plan which could, under such circumstances, be resorted to, they found to be a revolving series, that was to say, that so large a sinking fund should be created, by means of pledging the war taxes, for the extinction of the new debt incurred, that the debt should be extinguished before the whole of the war taxes should be thus pledged; thus leaving the portion of the war taxes first pledged at liberty to be again applied to a like purpose, and thus affording the means, of carrying on the war for an indefinite pe
523
524
The Earl of Westmoreland rose
to order. He submitted that the noble baron had transgressed the rules of order, in alluding to what was not before their lordships in any shape whatever.
Lord Grenville
My lords, the bill before your lordships is a bill for providing for a supply to support the public service, and the government of this country; and if the noble lord who calls me to order, knew properly the order of debate in parliament, he would be aware, that, upon the discussion of such a measure, every thing that has a bearing on the conduct of those who compose the king's government, is the subject of debate, if necessary; that a member of parliament may always bring any part of that government before the house of which he is a member, on the discussion of a question of supply.
The Earl of Westmoreland
I submit to your lordships, if it be irregular in a member
525
Lord Grenville
I hope the noble earl will not forget that he concurred in a measure, when he was lord lieutenant of Ireland, when the Irish. parliament was advised by him, to consider the state of the Irish catholics.
The Earl of Westmoreland
The noble baron is perfectly welcome to allude to any part of my conduct, and I am ready to defend it; but I do not see what application it has to the matter now before the house.
Lord Grenville
My lords, I know the right which belongs to a member of parliament; and nothing shall deter me from its exercise on occasions that call for it. I know that I have a right in this house to canvass the conduct of every part of the government, on a question of supply. I know I have a right to allude to the clamours which may have an effect on the public. My observations on what passed in Ireland was for the purpose of vindicating myself from the imputation of having said what I know would have been unparliamentary; I mean alledging of a member of parliament, that he had circulated opinions which he knew were not true. That I did not say: I had said, among other things, that to agree to the amendment which has been in this bill was, in my opinion, highly impolitic; and I then observed, that endeavours had been made to circulate unfounded clamours; but I think it impossible for any of his majesty's present ministers to countenance such clamours, because there is hardly one of them who has not been a party to a proposition which was made in parliament, for much greater concessions to the Roman catholics than that which was lately proposed, and upon which such endeavours have been made to excite a clamour; to create a false and unfounded alarm of danger to the country, and especially to the established church. I say, again, that his majesty's present ministers must be convinced of the fact, that no danger could arise to this country from the measure which was proposed in favour of the Roman catholics; because there is hardly one of them who has not in parliament assented to a measure of much more extensive concession to the Roman catholics; and more especially the noble earl, who has thought it proper to call me to order; for the measure he proposed to be adopted in Ireland was much more in favour of the Roman catholics than the measure lately proposed. I
526
Lord Harrowby
observed, that he had never known an instance where the terms agreed to by a chancellor of the exchequer, in his private room, were held to be binding on parliament and the king.
Lord.Grenville
informed the noble lord that resolutions had been passed by the house of commons previous to the negotiation of the loan.
Lord Harrowby
still maintained that there did not exist sufficient ground for him to alter his opinion on the subject. Was not the faith of the public pledged for 20 years? The great and comprehensive mind of his noble friend, might enable him to have a view of things which were not cognizable to persons who possessed a more moderate share of understanding; but, from all the details of the circumstances relative to the loan, and from the application of the war taxes, it appeared clearly to him, that the measure was too extensive in its nature and effects, to be considered binding on parliament. According to this plan the sinking fund would be lowered, when other funds were raised by the general prosperity of the country. He insisted that it was imprudent to state what we should do at a time when it was impossible for us now to ascertain what contingencies might possibly arise.
Lord Grenville
maintained that every possible care was taken to provide against every contingency. The public faith, in fact, was more than kept with the public creditor, whilst, at the same time, the plan was such that it secured the public, as far as any general and comprehensive system possibly could do, on the different changes in the price of the funds.
Lord Hawkesbury
said, that although he felt serious objections to this financial measure, yet he should not object to the bill's going through parliament for the present year, trusting that it would still remain open to the future and deliberate examination of parliament, and that the opinions which other persons might be inclined to offer on the subject, would meet with due attention. From the collision of such sentiments, he trusted that they would be better able to form an opinion as to the measures most proper to be adopted. He denied that there
527
The Earl of Lauderdale
declared that he had never heard within the walls of that house an assertion which tended more to sap the foundation of the credit of the country, than that which had just been made, by the noble secretary of state. Was it an assertion to be gravely listened to at this period of the world, and under the present momentous circumstances, that the public should not give credit to the resolutions of the house of commons until the assent of the house of lords had been obtained? Was this the rule of conduct that was observed by Mr. Pitt, on his negotiation for a loan with the house of Boyd and Co.? Did not parliament then think that they were in some measure bound even by the pledge of the minister? And
528
The Earl of Buckinghamshire
felt it necessary to make an observation on the allusion that had been made respecting the conduct of a noble friend of his whilst lord lieutenant of Ireland, under whom he had acted at that time. It was true that his noble friend, in his speech to the Irish parliament, recommended the granting of certain privileges to the catholics; but these privileges were not intended to be extended farther, than was specified in the bill afterwards passed. Beyond this act, passed in 1793, it was not intended to go one single step.
Lord Grenville
remarked, that he was sorry to notice a difference between the present statement of the noble earl, and the speech which his noble friend had delivered from the throne in Ireland. In that speech it was stated, that the advantages given to the catholics of Ireland would be extended to Great Britain. This, therefore, was a promise beyond that act.
The Earl of Buckinghamshire
in explanation, said, his meaning was, that no greater
529
Earl Spencer
felt it incumbent on him to contradict the assertion of a noble lord on the other side, who stated, that no measures had been resorted to by the present ministers to influence the public mind, on pretence of supporting the protestant religion. He could assure the house, from personal knowledge of the fact, that, in the town of Northampton, at the late election, the most inflammatory hand-bills, tending to excite the most dangerous riots in that town, had been universally circulated, which began with the words "Popery! or no Popery!" He never witnessed a more barefaced attempt to create disturbances; and the attempt had the desired effect; for the ignorant and illiterate people, having their prejudices and passions once put into motion, knew not where to stop; and this town, which only a few months before had been remarkable for the tranquillity and good order that prevailed in it, was now one continued scene of contention; and private families, who had long associated with each other in the utmost harmony and friendship, were now thrown into a state of party hostility and rancour. He could state several other facts upon this subject; but as he supposed the merits of the late and present administration would be discussed on some future occasion, he should, until then, reserve what he had to say.
Lord Holland
contended that tile conversation was, perfectly regular, as on a money bill it was always permitted to discuss general topics. The financial system of his noble friend, was a grand feature in the history of the country. If the ministers chose to raise an unfounded clamour among the mob, it was in parliament that they would stand and justify themselves; and this bill afforded the opportunity. It was relevant also to enter upon general topics, as the amendment, it would appear from what had been stated by the noble lord on the other side, was only the harbinger to the total destruction of the system. Though he, and those with whom he acted, had differed from his noble friend (Grenville) on some important points, they had not attempted, when in opposition, to take advantage of the mistaken feelings of the mob. He remembered, when the country was in a calamitous situation, when the scarcity had disposed people to acts of violence What would have been the situation of the
530
531
532
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, April 23.
[MINUTES.]—Sir Vicary Gibbs
the attorney-general, took the oaths and his seat.—A new writ was ordered to be issued for the county of Louth, in the room of the right hon. John Foster, who had accepted the office of chancellor of the exchequer for Ireland.—Mr. Bankes moved, that there be laid before the house an account of the regulations established in the British Museum since February, 1805, for the preservation of the collection, and for the more free and easy access of the public; and also an account of the numbers admitted from the 9th of February, 1805, to the present time, specifying the numbers in each month of that period. Ordered.—General Fitzpatrick brought up the bill for paying the pensions of half-pay officers, their widows, and persons on the compassionate list, at their .several places of residence He stated that the bill was approved of by his successor, who would follow up the arrangement. The Secretary at War said, that the object of the bill was highly proper, that he entirely approved of it, and would contribute every thing in his power to carry it into effect. The bill was then read a first time.
[CALICO PRINTERS' BILL.]—Mr. Sheridan
moved the second reading of the Journeymen Calico Printers' Bill.
Sir Robert Peele
said, that although, on account of his ill health, he had been given leave to absent himself from his duty in parliament, yet he should feel great self-reproach, if he should allow a bill so mischievous as he conceived this to be, to pass, without giving it his decided opposition. He was himself a friend to the Journeymen Calico Printers, and he conceived that he and the other Master-Printers had done them more service than they would ever receive from the speeches of the right hon. gent. (Mr. Sheridan). The Journeymen in their first demand of limiting the number of apprentices, seemed to act upon the principle, that they were able by combination to give
533
Mr. D. Giddy
supported this motion. He considered that in the present state of society, it was not so much the tyranny of kings and great men that was to be apprehended, as the tyranny of the many over the few. He considered that nothing was more dangerous than combinations among journeymen. If the agricultural labourers were to combine in a similar manner, and demand for their labour more than their fair proportion of the land, the country must rapidly fall to ruin.
Mr. Jacob
began by observing, that in 1791, this country only exported to the value of one million annually in cotton goods; but, now, in sixteen years after that period, the quantity exported amounted to 9,750,000l., being more than one third of the whole amount of our exports. This great increase was owing to the skill and talents of the Calico Printers. In the infancy of this trade, some degree of philosophy was necessary, and a considerable knowledge of chemistry; but now, by the division of labour, the business of a calico printer did not require more skill than any other handicraft trade, and therefore the present race of calico printers were not entitled to better wages than most other mechanics. It was allowed, that a boy of 14 could, in a few months, learn the whole business, and yet the average wages were 25s. a week, although the workmen lived for the most part in the Northern counties, where those wages would go much farther than they would in a Southern county. He did not see that the Journeymen Calico printers had any serious subject of complaint, and therefore he should oppose the present bill.
534
Mr. P. Moore
declared that the anxious wish of the committee was, that the masters and journeymen should regulate the matter among themselves, without bringing it before parliament. The complaint of the journeymen was this; that a large number of loyal, dutiful, and faithful subjects were now without employment and without bread, in consequence of the grievances of which they complained. He conceived it the first duty of government to see that the subjects of the realm had bread. He felt a good deal for the rights of journeymen; his constituents were either journeymen, or had been journeymen, and he had, therefore, considered that kind of right which was derived from having served an apprenticeship. He considered, that from the system of apprenticeships was derived, not only the superior skill of our workmen in every department, but a great part of the practical morality of the British nation. He admitted, that on account of the division of labour, a boy could be taught to do the business in a very short time, as well as a journeyman. The consequence was, that as soon as the boy was out of his apprenticeship he also found himself out of bread. It was therefore in this branch of trade, more than in any other, that some regulations were wanting to insure a subsistence to the journeymen.
Mr. Henry
Erskine considered, that whatever might be the grievances of the journeymen, the present bill would not afford the remedy. It was against the first principles of civil liberty, as well as against all the commercial maxims which had hitherto been received. The first clause of it was to prevent masters from taking more than a certain number of apprentices. This was a regulation, which had never before been demanded from parliament. Every man had an undoubted right to teach his trade to as many people as he chose. He thought the cry against the numbers coming into the trade was as ridiculous as if he or others, old journeymen in the profession of the law, should come to parliament to complain of the number of young men of talents that were educating for that profession, and beg that the house would shut the door against them, for fear they should interfere with the old practitioners. As to the wages given he thought that that, as well as the price of the article, would of themselves find their level. He therefore was decidedly in opposition to the bill.
Mr. Sheridan
defended the bill. He said it would have been well if his hon. and learned friend (Mr. H.Erskine) had con-
535
536
537
Mr. Horner
opposed the bill as did Mr. Dent; and the question being put for the second reading this day 3 months, it was carried without a division.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, April 24.
[MINUTES.] Sir J. Henderson
gave to notice of his intention to move, on Tuesday, for leave to bring in a bill for making better provisions to enable members against whom election petitions may be presented, to recover costs from such petitioners as may afterwards abandon their petitions without due notice to such members. The hon. bart. stated, that in consequence of due notice, not having been given in a recent case, the sitting member was at the expense of bringing several witnesses from a distance of no less than 400 miles, and was proceeding to remark upon the probability and injustice of many similar instances, when the Speaker stopped him, by stating the irregularity of offering more on this occasion than a mere statement of the motion he meant to bring forward.—Mr. Vausittart appeared at the bar, and read the report of the committee upon the Shrewsbury election. This report stated, that the hon. H. G. Bennet was not duly qualified according to law, and therefore that he ought not to have been elected; that the petitions against him from Mr. T. Jones and others, and the defence made against them, were not frivolous or vexatious; and that the election, so far as regarded the said H. G. Bennet, was void. After the report was delivered in at the table, a new writ was ordered for the election of a representative for Shrewsbury, in the room of Mr. Bennet.—Mr. Horner gave notice of a motion for Wednesday, for the production of papers relative to the Polygar war, adding, that be should bring this motion forward, after the business with regard to the Carnatic, which an hon. baronet (sir T. Turton) had announced his intention to bring forward, should be disposed of.— Sir Francis said, that he meant in the course of next week, upon a day, which, early in the week,
538
[POOR LAWS BILL.] Mr. Whitbread
moved the order of the day for the recommitment of the first of the four bills, into which, at the suggestion of the house, he had divided his general bill. The bill now to be committed, was that for establishing a Plan for the Education of the Poor. The order of the day being read, and the question being put that the Speaker do now leave the chair, Mr. Whitbread rose to state the nature and object of this bill. It was not meant, he said, to supersede any parish schools for the education of the poor, already established; it was not meant to increase unnecessarily the, charge upon any district, where parish schools were already instituted for the education of the poor, by establishing therein additional schools; his object was, that in every parish where there was a number of poor who could not afford to pay for the education of their children, there should be a school established for their instruction. But, as he proposed the education of the poor to be the incipient principle and grand foundation of all the benefits to be derived in future from the measures of reform in the Poor Laws, he thought this bill, which went peculiarly to that object, should be first established. If, therefore any hon. member had any objections to the principle of the bill, this was the proper time to state them.
Mr. Ellison
said, that, upon the first introduction of these bills, he had, in compliance with the hon. gent.'s injunction, forborne to enter into any discussion on the merits of the plan, understanding that it was first to go forth in the shape of a proposition to the country at large, and that time would be given to gentlemen throughout
539
Mr. Rose
was of the same opinion; but although he thought the hon. member who brought forward this subject entitled to the thanks of the country, yet he had his doubts, whether educating the lower orders of the people, upon the principle laid down in this bill, would have the effect either of ameliorating their condition in the degree which seemed to be hoped, or of alleviating the burthens of the poor's rates, by that means, within such a period as should in any degree convince the country of any benefit to be derived from a measure which, for a considerable time, must go to increase those burthens. The bill proposed, that the poor children of each parish should be entitled to two years education between the age of 7 and 14: the consequences naturally would be, that the earlier part of this period would be chosen by the parents, as that in their children's labour would be the least profitable to them. Now, the advantages to be derived to the minds and morals of children in that class of life, from two years of education at that early part of life, did not appear to him so very considerable as the hon. gent. professed to expect; and to carry the system of education to the labouring poor still higher, would, he feared, tend rather to raise their minds above their lot in life, and by no means strengthen their attachments to those laborious pursuits, by which they were to earn a livelihood; pursuits to which, at present, there existed; throughout the poor of this country, a very strong reluctance. If, therefore, care was not taken to blend with their education early habits of industry, he feared that schooling would rather injure than serve them, in
540
Mr. Fuller
observed, that as the hon. gent. had thought fit to divide his original bill into four bills, this shewed that he had not at first fully considered the subject of the poor laws in all its bearings; he could therefore wish that the subject should be deferred to another session, when the bill might be introduced
de novo
541
Mr. Buller
supported the bill, and instanced the happy effects of parochial education upon the population of Scotland.
Mr. Roscoe
thought the improvement of the lower classes an object highly desirable as nothing could be more disgraceful than to leave them in a state of ignorance. The only distinction between this country and a savage nation arose out of knowledge, and of course the diffusion of that blessing must operate to advance our superiority. He contended that the alleviation of the poor s-rates must follow as a natural consequence of the measure before the house. For the uneducated man, having nothing but his bodily strength to depend upon, became of necessity a burthen upon the parish when that strength was gone; whereas the man of education, in consequence of the wider range which his mind naturally took, could find other resources to maintain himself when he could derive no support from his mere animal powers. Thus he conceived that education must tend to diminish the amount of the poor's-rate. In support of this opinion, the hon. member quoted the good effects of national education in Scotland which had progressively improved for a series of years, and in which, before the system proposed by this bill was introduced, these were no less than 200,000 beggars, who not only formed a burthen upon the public, but a most mischievous example with regard to morality, industry and law. But the most important end of national education, the hon. member conceived to be that which appeared in a Letter from Mr. Malthus to the hon mover of the bill, namely, as the learned writer stated, that "as the first object was to elevate the general character of the poor, this or any measure which tended to it was entitled to support." After such an opinion, from such a quarter, he thought that no Sound objection could be made to this measure.
Mr. Calcraft
was friendly to the principle of the bill, and was for carrying it into effect as speedily as possible. He thought also, that industry ought to be combined with knowledge. It was the advantage of the plan which was called Mr. Lancaster's, but Which was really discovered by Dr. Bell, rector of Swanage, that it afforded, in the rapidity With which it conveyed learning, full time for industry. But though he was Most anxious to have this part of the plan carried into effect, he feared it would hardly be received with satisfaction in the country,
542
Mr. Henry Erskine
found it impossible for him to give a silent vote upon the subject. He could not help hailing this bill as a measure auspicious in the highest degree to the industry, the morality, the happiness, and good order of the people of this country. He was happy to give an example of the practical effect of education in the country from which he came (Scotland). It was to that that he attributed the total exemption of Scotland from the heavy burden of the poor laws, which oppress so much the middling classes of society in this country. It was education which gave the poor of Scotland too much pride and spirit to apply for parochial relief in their own country; and it was education which enabled them to distinguish themselves so much in every line when they left it. As to the emigrations from Scotland, they were generally supposed to proceed from the barrenness of the country, and from the principle of the proverb, "need makes the old wife trot;" but he considered that it rather proceeded from their talents being cultivated by education, and their having, in this respect, an advantage over the people of most nations to which they emigrated. Scotland was, to be sure, a barren country, and yet there were no people on earth more distinguished in horticulture. Scotch gardeners were to be found every where through England and Wales, and it was not only in this art that his countrymen excelled, but in such a variety of arts and sciences, that unless the house were to attribute it entirely to the
ingenium Scotorum,
543
Mr. Davies Giddy
mentioned, that in the part of England that he lived in, (Cornwall), education was pretty generally diffused; at least so much of it, that almost every person there had learned reading, writing, and something of arithmetic. He thought it was easy to persuade parents, that it was to their advantage that their children should be brought up in the habits of industry. He thought that education would not be the better for being made compulsory; it Was better that it should be voluntarily, and not be forced; that "it should descend like the gentle dew of Heaven," and be received as a general blessing. He did not think it Would be easy to induce parents to consent to any forced system of education for their children.
Mr. Spencer Stanhope
did not think the opinion of the Country yet fully collected on this measure. His opinion was, shortly, that the expence of the plan was certain, and the benefit very uncertain. Schoolmasters. and schoolmistresses were very difficult to be got. The value of learning had risen less than any thing else, in proportion to the depreciation of money; and, therefore, the number of persons competent to be schoolmasters and schoolmistresses was much diminished. He thought that if the schoolmasters could be got, it was doubtful whether the scholars could. The poor were anxious to make profit of the labour of their children as soon as possible. He gave the hon. gent. every credit for his praiseworthy exertions, though he saw these impediments in the way of his plan.
Mr. Sharpe
did not see how any of the objections that had been made affected the principle of the bill. All of them went to delay, though no good reason was assigned for this delay. He wished to shew the country, that the house could suspend its political and party contests, in order to join with common accord in matters of avowed public utility. The poor children would at all events be educated. The only question was, whether they should be well or ill educated? It was not in the school, nor under public or private masters alone, that education could be had. Children, if left alone, would educate themselves. But he who educated himself generally had a fool for his master. He did not think it possible that education could give sentiments above the condition of the individuals. Education would give habits of industry and attention. He wished for more
544
Lord Porchester
adverted to the reference that had been made to the difference between the education of the people in the northern and those in the southern part of Great Britain; and declared it to be his belief that, if it were not for the introduction of the Scots into England, there would be a great vacuum in many stations of society in this part of the island. That their steady, industrious, and thinking habit was attributable to their different mode of education, he thought was extremely probable. But, as to the idea of engrafting a system of national industry on a system of national education, that was in his opinion extremely chimerical. Instead of doing any thing of that sort, which might tend to render the bill intricate and oppressive, he should give his vote for the house now resolving itself into the committee on the bill which was now before them.
Mr. Simeon
thought there was no need of going to the North for illustrations, nor to say much to that house upon the value of education. He thought it desirable that every one should be taught to read, but did not see the necessity of teaching every one to write: he disapproved of an addition of one shilling in the pound on the poor rates, which would be the effect of this bill, laid on for the prospect, at some years hence, afforded to some poor educated person of raising himself from his situation. He contended it was by no Means to be admitted that, because Scotland, in 1698, had received an establishment of schools, and had profited by it, that, therefore England, in her present civilized state, in 1807, should adopt similar regulations. He had taken great pains to examine the state of the poor, and should particularly speak of the town he represented (Reading), which contained 10,000 inhabitants, of whom 7,500 were poor; but hardly a child of ten years old was to be found who had not learned to read, at some of the threepenny schools which are kept by the poor old people. He saw no necessity for writing or arithmetic. He knew of no deficiency in the number of candidates for bankers clerks, and such situations, He
545
Mr. George Vansittart
was of opinion, that the establishment of parochial schools in the manner proposed by the bill was much too expensive. He did not think at first, that the occupiers of lands and houses should be taxed, in order that all the children in the country should be taught to read and write, especially when it was doubtful, whether writing would be of any real use. However, However, he would vote for the bill going into the committee.
Mr. Bragge Bathurst
though he could not but admit that the principle of diffusing instruction among the lower classes was good, could not say that he approved of this bill. He had received a communication from the part of the country with which he was connected, that the whole of the bill of the hon. gent. was disapproved of at the quarter sessions, as extremely burthensome, without any adequate advantage. One of his objections to this bill was, that it tended to give an education to the lower classes above their condition, and comprehended objects too great for any one measure. The hon. mover of the bill had not yet made any statement of the present means of educating the lower classes. If his bill were to pass, there would be no compulsion to force attendance at the schools, and consequently the first menace of wholesome discipline, would put an end to the attendance of the individual threatened. He also objected to this bill, because it would do away Sunday schools, to which no person would subscribe, when the parochial schools should be established.
Mr. Wilberforce
said, that he thought the house and the country were under great obligations to the hon. gent. who had introduced this measure, as it must have required much exertion and attention to make out four such bills as those before them; but at the same time he could not help thinking, that parliament ought to proceed with great caution upon such a subject. They were now undertaking, for the first time, a great work, which had been too long delayed, the diffusion of the benefits of education; and
546
Mr. Windham
after paying some very handsome compliments to the hon. mover for his good intentions in the formation of the bill then before the house, observed, that this was a subject which most particularly required deliberate consideration. It was impossible, of all others, that this subject could be decided uno flatu. It was an
547
548
549
Mr. Whitbread
contended against the principle laid down by his right hon. friend. Was it to be believed, that one of the most erudite men of his day, that an enlightened statesman of the nineteenth century, could stand forward in that house to argue against the universal diffusion of knowledge? That a man who was himself the shining example of the great and good effects resulting from education, could now be an advocate for ignorance? That the representative of a free people could say, that the people were the more free when they were the less enlightened? His right hon. friend had said, that persons the most interested in any business were generally the least qualified for that business; and had instanced such a position by one of those illustrations with which his right hon. friend more frequently amused than convinced the house. A patient, it had been said, was of all others the least capable of assisting himself. But what formed the grand distinction between brutes and human beings so circumstanced? The latter could point out the seat of their disease, and thus direct the skill of the physician; so that, to carry on the illustration, information was in a high degree essential to the patient. Much had been said respecting the increased burthens of the poor rates; he contended for it that the proposed system of education would considerably reduce those burthens. In Scotland, the poor rates were almost nothing. In Westmoreland, and other English counties, where education in a greater proportion prevailed, the rates were in the same proportion lessened. As to the application to France, he thought it made for his argument; for though those who were at the head of the Revolution might have been enlightened, was notorious that the instruments in the hands of those men were the most ignorant and brutal of the Parisian mob; but it was singular, to hear such an argument from one, who, in introducing to that house the military plan that did him so much honour, had observed that the Scots made the best soldiers, and why? because the Scots were in general the best educated. His right hon. friend then said, "give me a soldiery of exalted character." He, (Mr. Whitbread) now said, give me a
550
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
expressed his readiness to concur in the motion for
551
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Saturday, April 25.
[MINUTES.]
The royal assent was given by commission to the Loan Interest bill, the Irish Loan bill, the Treasurer of the Navy's Regulation bill, the Customs Fees bill, the Innkeepers Subsistence bill, the Sicilian Prize Money bill, the Tanners bill, several other public, and a number of private bills. The commissioners were the lord chancellor, and lords Walsingham and Hawkesbury.—The bills on the table were forwarded in their respective stages, and the house adjourned till Monday.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Saturday, April 25.
[MINUTES.]
The house met at half-past three, and were summoned by the black rod to the house of peers to hear the royal assent given to several public and private bills.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Saturday, April 25
[KING'SPEECH.]
About a quarter before three o'clock the lord chancellor, earl Camden, and lord Hawkesbury, took their seats as his majesty's commissioners. Mr. Quarme, the deputy usher of the black rod, was sent to the house of commons to require their attendance. After some time had elapsed, the Speaker, accompanied by a great number of members of the house of com-
552
The Lord Chancellor
in his majesty's name, delivered the following speech:
"
My Lords and Gentlemen
We have it in command from his majesty to inform you, that his majesty has thought fit to avail himself of the first moment which would admit of an interruption of the sitting of parliament, without material inconvenience to the public business, to close the present session; and that his majesty has therefore been pleased to cause a commission to be issued under the great seal for proroguing the parliament.— We are further commanded to state to you, that his majesty is anxious to recur to the sense of his people, while the events which have recently taken place are yet fresh in their recollection.—His majesty feels, that in resorting to this measure, under the present circumstances, he at once demonstrates, in the most unequivocal manner, his own conscientious persuasion of the rectitude of those motives upon which he has acted, and affords to his people the best opportunity of testifying their determination to support him in every exercise of the prerogative of his crown, which is conformable to the sacred obligations under which they are held, and conducive to the welfare of his kingdom, and to the security of the constitution.—His majesty directs us to express his entire conviction, that after so long a reign, marked by a series of indulgences to his Roman catholic subjects, they, in common with every other class of his people, must feel assured of his attachment to the principles of a just and enlightened toleration, and of his anxious desire to protect equally and promote impartially the happiness of all descriptions of his subjects."
553
The Lord Chancellor
said, "My Lords and Gentlemen, By virtue of his majesty's commission under the great seal, to us and other lords directed, and now read, we do, in his majesty's name, and in obedience to his commands, prorogue this parliament to Wednesday, the 13th of May next, to be then here holden; and this parliament is accordingly prorogued to Wednesday, the 13th day of May next."
The lords commissioners
then withdrew from the house, and the commons retired from the bar.
554
HOUSE OF COMMONS
Monday, April 27.
[MINUTES.] The Speaker
came down to the house at five minutes past threee o'clock, and immediately after prayers were over was proceeding to count the house, its order to take the chair, when Mr. Quarme, yeoman usher of the black rod (who had been waiting in the lobby for the Speaker's arrival) announced himself in the usual way, with a message from the house of peers. The Speaker consequently took his seat in the chair, and Mr. Quarme came into the body of the house, and delivered the following message:—"Mr. Speaker, The lords, authorized by virtue of his majest. commiss. for declaring the royal assent to several bills which have been agreed to by both houses, and also for proroguing this present parliament, do desire the immediate attendance of this hon. house in the house of peers, to hear the commission read."—The Speaker then accompanied by most of the members present, proceeded to the house of lords, and on his return calling the members round the table, read to them a copy of the King's speech; after which the members separated.—Thus ended the First and only Session of the Third Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
555
LIST OF PUBLIC ACTS
Passed in the First and only Session of the Third Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and in the 47th Year of the Reign of his present Majesty George III. with the Date of their meeting the Royal Assent
January 6, 1807
1. An Act to revive and make perpetual and to amend an Act, made in the 42d Year of his present Majesty, for the further Regulation of the Trials of controverted Elections or Returns of Members to serve in Parliament, and for expediting the Proceedings relating thereto.
January 16
2. An Act for raising the Sum of £10,500,000 by Loans or Exchequer Bills, for the Service of Great Britain for the Year 1807.
January 22
3. An Act for continuing and granting to his Majesty certain Duties upon Malt in Great Britain, for the Service of the Year 1807.
4. An Act for continuing and granting to his Majesty a Duty on Pensions, Offices, and Personal Estates, in England; and certain Duties on Sugar, Malt, Tobacco, and Snuff, in Great Britain, for the Service of the Year 1807.
Feb. 19
5. An Act to indemnify such Persons in the United Kingdom as have omitted to qualify themselves for Offices and Employments; and for extending the Times limited for those Purposes respectively, until the 25th Day of December, 1807, and to permit such Persons in Great Britain as have omitted to make and file Affidavits of the Execution of Indentures of Clerks to Attornies and Solicitors, to make and file the same on or before the 1st Day of Michælmas Term 1807.
6. An Act to continue, during the present War, and until 1 Year after the Termination thereof by the Ratification of a Definitive Treaty of Peace, an Act made in the 44th Year of his present Majesty, for empowering his Majesty to accept the Services of such Parts of His Militia Forces in Ireland, as might voluntarily offer themselves to be employed in Great Britain.
7. An Act to declare that certain Provisions of an Act of the last Session of the last Parliament, intituled, An Act to permit the free Interchange of every Species of Grain between Great Britain and Ireland shall ex-
556
8. An Act to continue for the Term of 7 Years certain Acts of the Parliament of Ireland, for preventing the Importation of Arms, Gunpowder, and Ammunition, and the making, removing, selling, and keeping of Gunpowder, Arms, and Ammunition, without Licence.
9. An Act for allowing the Exportation annually of a limited Quantity of Worsted Yarn to Canada.
10. An Act for raising the Sum of £1,000,000 by Treasury Bills for the Service of Ireland for the Year 1807.
11. An Act to authorize his Majesty, until the 25th Day of March, 1808, to make Regulations respecting the Trade and Commerce to and from the Cape of Good Hope.
12. An Act to abolish certain Offices in the Customs of Ireland; and to abolish or regulate certain other offices therein.
13. An Act for investing certain Commissioners appointed for the Examination of Accounts and Expenditure relating to the Office of Barrack Master General, with certain Powers and Authorities necessary for the Examination of such Accounts and Expenditure.
14. An Act to amend several Acts, for regulating the Trial of Controverted Elections or Returns of Members to serve in Parliament, so far as the same relate to Ireland.
15. An Act to continue for the Term of 7 Years, certain Acts for the better Prevention and Punishment of Attempts to seduce Persons serving in his Majesty's Forces by Sea or Land from their Duty and Allegiance to his Majesty, or to incite them to Mutiny or Disobedience.
March 16
16. An Act to amend several Acts for the Sale of his Majesty's Quit Rents, Crown and other Rents, and of certain Lands forfeited and undisposed of in Ireland.
17. An Act to secure the Collection of the Duties on Auctions in Ireland; and to prevent Frauds therein.
18. An Act to grant to his Majesty certain Inland Duties of Excise and Taxes in Ireland,
557
19. An Act to provide more effectually for regulating the Drawbacks and Bounties on the Exportation of Sugar from Ireland; and for allowing British Plantation Sugar to be Warehoused in Ireland, until the 25th Day of March, 1808.
20. An Act to suspend, until the First Day of May, 1807, the Payment of all Drawbacks on Spirits made or distilled in Great Britain or Ireland, and exported from either Country to the other respectively.
21. An Act to provide for regulating and securing the Collection of certain Rates and Taxes in Ireland, in respect of Dwelling Houses, Fire Hearths, Windows, Male Servants, Horses, Dogs, and Carriages.
22. An Act to allow for 2 Years, from and after the passing of this Act, an additional Bounty on Double Refined Sugar, and to extend former Bounties on other Refined Sugar to such as shall be pounded, crashed, or broken; and to allow for 1 Year certain Bounties on British Plantation Raw Sugar exported.
23. An Act for repealing so much of an Act, made in the 9th Year of her late Majesty Queen Anne, as vests in the South Sea Company or Corporation, by the said Act erected, the sole and exclusive Privilege of carrying on Trade and Traffic to and from any Part whatsoever of South America, or in the south Seas, which now are or may at any Time hereafter be in the Possession of his Majesty, his Heirs or Successors.
24. An Act for allowing, until the 1st Day of August, 1808, the Importation of certain Fish from Newfoundland and the Coast of Labrador, and for granting a Bounty thereon.
25. An Act to allow Turkey Tobacco to be imported into Great Britain, in small Packages.
26. An Act for extending to German Yarn the Provisions of an Act made in the last Session of the last Parliament for permitting Prussian Yarn to be imported in Foreign Ships on Payment of the like Duties as if imported in British Ships.
27. An Act for granting to his Majesty, until 12 Months after the Ratification of a Definitive Treaty of Peace, certain additional Duties of Excise on Brandy in Great Britain.
28. An Act for raising the Sum of £14,200,000 by way of Annuities.
558
March 23
29. An Act for further continuing, until the 25th Day of March, 1808, certain Bounties and Drawbacks on the Exportation of Sugar from Great Britain; and for suspending the Countervailing Duties and Bounties on Sugar when the Duties imposed by an Act of the last session of Parliament shall be suspended.
30. An Act to continue, until the 25th Day of March, 1810, an Act of the 44th Year of his present Majesty, for permitting the Exportation of Salt from the Port of Nassau in the Island of New Providence, the Port of Exuma, and the Port of Crooked Island in the Bahama Islands, in Ships belonging to the Inhabitants of the United States of America, and coming in Ballast.
31. An Act to repeal Part of the uty on the Importation of unmanufactured Tobacco into Ireland.
32. An Act for punishing Mutiny and Desertion; and for the better Payment of the Army and their Quarters.
33. An Act for the Regulation of his Majesty's Royal Marine Forces while on Shore.
34. An Act for continuing, until the 1st Day of August, 1808, an Act of the 45th Year of his present Majesty, for allowing, under certain Restrictions, the bringing a limited Quantity of Coals, Culm, or Cinders, to London and Westminster, by Inland Navigation.
March 25
35. An Act to secure the. Payment of the Duties on Licences granted to Persons in Ireland dealing in Exciseable Commodities.
36. An Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade.
37. An Act to continue, until the 25th Day of March, 1814, and amend an Act, made in the 30th and 40th Year of his present Majesty, for the more effectual Prevention of Depredations on the River Thames and its vicinity; and to amend an Act, made in the 2d Year of his present Majesty, to prevent the committing of Thefts and Frauds by Persons navigating Bum-Boats, and other Boats, upon the River Thames.
April 9
38. An Act to amend several Acts for regulating and securing the Collection of the Duties on Paper, made in Ireland; and to make perpetual so much of an Act made in the 45th Year of his present Majesty, as relates to Paper Hangings printed or stained in Ireland.
559
39. An Act to rectify a Mistake in an Act made in the last Session of Parliament, for enabling his Majesty to settle Annuities on certain Branches of the Royal Family.
April 25
40. An Act to grant to his Majesty, until the 29th Day of September, 1808, a Duty upon Malt made in Ireland, and upon Spirits made or distilled in Ireland, and to allow certain drawbacks on the Exportation thereof.
41. An Act to continue, until the 25th Day of March, 1808, and from thence until the End of the then next Session of Parliament, an Act, made in the 44th Year of his present Majesty's Reign, for appointing Commissioners to enquire into the Fees, Gratuities, Perquisites, and Emoluments received in several Public Offices in Ireland; to examine into any Abuses which may exist in the same, and into the Mode of receiving, collecting, issuing, and accounting for Public Money in Ireland.
42. An Act to continue for 21 Years, so much of certain Acts of the Parliament of Ireland, as relate to the lighting, cleansing, and watching of Cities and Towns, for the lighting, cleansing, and watching of which no particular Provision is made by any Act of Parliament.
43. An Act to declare, that the Provisions of an Act made in the Parliament of Ireland in the 33d Year of King Henry the Eighth, relating to Servants Wages, shall extend to all Counties of Cities and Counties of Towns in Ireland.
44. An Act to amend an Act made in the last Session of Parliament, for regulating and providing for the Relief of the Poor and the Management of Infirmaries and Hospitals in Ireland.
45. An Act to continue an Act made in the Parliament of Ireland, in the 31st Year of the Reign of his late, Majesty King George the Second, for the better supplying the City of Dublin with Coals, and for the better Encouragement of the Collieries of Ireland.
40. An Act for raising the Sum of £1,500,000 by way of Annuities, for the Service of Ireland.
47. An Act to authorize the Payment of Prize Money arising from Captures made by Ships of his Sicilian Majesty in conjunction with British Ships, to the Sicilian Envoy, for the use of the Officers and Men of such Ships; and also the Payment of Money arising out of Proceeds of Prizes or Captures made by any other Ships or Vessels belonging to Foreign States, in conjunction with his Majesty's Ships.
48. An Act to repeal so much of certain
560
49. An Act for permitting the Exportation of Fullers Earth, Fulling Clay, and Tobacco Pipe Clay, to any Place in Possession of his Majesty.
50. An Act to repeal the several Duties under the Care of the Commissioners for managing the Stamp Duties in Ireland, and to grant new and additional Duties in lieu thereof; and to amend the Laws relating to the Stamp Duties in Ireland.
51. An Act to extend the Provisions of an Act made in the last Session of Parliament, for abolishing Fees received by certain Officers and other Persons employed in the Service of the Customs in the Port of London, and for regulating the Attendance of Officers and others so employed, to the Out-Ports; and to appropriate the Fees of certain abolished and vacant Offices in the Customs to the Superannuation Fund.
52. An Act for enabling his Majesty to grant the Palace, called the King's House, with the Appurtenances, situate in Greenwich Park, in the County of Kent, to the Commissioners for the Government of the Royal Naval Asylum, and for enabling the said Commissioners to appoint a Chaplain to officiate therein.
53. An Act to suspend for 12 Months so much of an Act of the 2d Year of King James the First, intituled, An Act concerning Tanners, Curriers, Shoemakers, and other Artificers, occupying the cutting of Leather, as prohibits the regrating and ingrossing of Oaken Bark.
54. An Act for increasing the Rates of Subsistence to be paid to Innkeepers and others on quartering Soldiers.
55. An Act for charging the Sum of £12,000,000, Part of the Loan of Twelve Millions two hundred thousand Pounds, raised for the Service of Great Britain for the Year 1807, upon the Duties of Customs and Excise, granted to his Majesty during the continuance of the present War, and for certain Periods after the Ratification of a Definitive Treaty of Peace; and for providing a Sinking Fund for the Redemption of the Stocks or Funds thereby created.
56. An Act for the further regulating the Office of Treasurer of his Majesty's Navy.