HL Deb 30 April 1838 vol 42 cc671-3
The Earl of Winchilsea

said, that, in answer to a question which he had put to the noble Viscount on Friday evening, he had been informed that an individual to whom he had then alluded had not been appointed to the situation of legal adviser to the noble Earl who was going out as Governor of Canada. He now, however, understood that that individual had not only left this country for Canada, but that he had gone out in her Majesty's ship which also carried the noble Earl. He, therefore, called on the noble Viscount at the head of her Majesty's Government to give an explicit answer to a statement, which affected not only the character of the country, but the character of their Sovereign. When he mentioned this subject on Friday last, he objected not to the appointment of such a functionary by the Crown, with any reference to its usefulness, or with any reference to its expense—his objection rested solely on the ground of character, and of character only. Differing, as he did, from the noble Viscount on many important opinions and principles, and believing, as he did, that many of the measures introduced by him were dangerous to the safety of the country, still he had hitherto given him credit for honesty and openness in the manner in which he brought them forward; and deeply should he regret if he found anything in the course which the noble Viscount had pursued in this instance that should have the effect of weakening or shaking that opinion. But he must freely state, that if he found the individual to whom he had alluded going out to Canada in a responsible situation, going out in a public character now, or with a promise that, when he got out there, he should be placed in a situation of public trust and confidence—if he found that to be the case, then he would only state, and he would state it boldly and openly to the noble Viscount, that he had not acted with that candour which became him. With the answer which he had received on Friday evening he had sat down perfectly satisfied. But now he was informed that this individual, if he had not gone out to Canada in an official capacity, had, at all events, gone thither at the public expense. It could scarcely be supposed, looking to the situation which he held in the legal profession, that he would go there for nothing; it could not be imagined that he had gone out to serve the country at his own private expense; and he would not do so much injustice to the noble Earl who was selected to fill so dignified a situation—he would not think so lightly of his character—as to suppose that this individual, who had appeared as a criminal at their Lordships' Bar, had gone out in the character of that noble Earl's private friend. No; it was impossible that that noble Earl should admit to his friendship and confidence an individual whose conduct had banished him from all female, from all moral, society. What he asked of the noble Viscount then was—first, whether a public situation of any description or character was ever offered to this individual? Second, whether any promise had been given to him that when he arrived in British Canada he should be appointed to any public situation? And third, whether, if he were not going out in a public character, or in any character at all, his expenses were to be defrayed in whole or in part by the public? If this individual had in any way been recommended to a public situation, or if any portion of his expenses were to be defrayed by the public, he should boldly contend that such a proceeding was highly objectionable, and he should give their Lordships an opportunity of expressing their opinion on what he would contend was, if the fact were so, a gross dereliction of duty on the part of Ministers. They ought to be most cautious in the selection of those who were to fill important stations, and more particularly so when they considered the tender years, the inexperience, and the confiding nature of their royal Mistress. If there were one duty more imperative upon Ministers than another, it was to guard the public and private character of the Queen—to encourage around her worth and virtue. Those formed the best defence and security of the Throne. They commanded the affections of the people, and while they added dignity to the Throne, they encouraged the growth of virtue and morality throughout the whole community. He again asked, was this individual offered a public situation at any time, or did he go out with a promise that he should have that situation when he arrived in Canada? Further, he should ask of the noble Viscount, if such a situation had been injudiciously given to this person by the noble Earl who was proceeding to Canada, whether he was to be allowed any remuneration from the public purse?

Viscount Melbourne

.—I have no difficulty whatever in answering the observations of the noble Earl, which have exceeded a great deal the limits which are usually permitted to noble Lords in putting those questions which are expected to be answered by the courtesy of the House. The questions which the noble Earl has put to me relate to matters with which I am not acquainted, and which certainly affect most deeply the character of the Gentleman to whom he has alluded. But I do not intend to enter into any details of which I am not in possession, and I shall confine myself most strictly to answering the questions which the noble Earl has put to me. I say, then, first of all, that no situation whatever was offered by her Majesty's Government to the Gentleman whose name he has alluded to; and next, that that Gentleman has gone out to Canada, if he has gone out at all—which I do not mean to deny—without any appointment, without any prospect of an appointment, and without any intention on the part of Government, or on the part of my noble Friend, the Earl of Durham, to appoint him to any public situation whatever.