The Marquess of Londonderryhaving the other night been referred to the noble Earl at the head of the Admiralty, wished now to repeat the question which he had then put, with respect to what that noble Earl considered to be the construction of the 2d article of the Quadripartite Treaty. He apprehended that the noble Earl had taken an entirely incorrect view of that question. The noble Earl certainly construed that article of the treaty in a way totally different from the noble Duke (Wellington) behind him, whose opinion had been confirmed and corroborated in the fullest manner by the colleague of the noble Earl, the noble Viscount at the head of her Majesty's Government. Such was the difference of opinion between the noble Viscount and the noble Earl; and under those circumstances he had a right to call on the noble Earl to satisfy the country and the House that he had abandoned those private views which he had formerly stated to their Lordships, and adopted the opinions entertained by the noble Viscount at the head of the Administration. This was a matter of grave importance, because if the noble Earl would still in a supposed case hold himself justified in issuing instructions, such as those which had been complained of—founded on his notions of the treaty, that private opinion of the noble Earl's, contradicted as it had been by his noble colleagues, might involve this country and Europe in a war. He wished, therefore, to know whether the noble Earl at the head of the Admiralty had recanted his former opinions in deference to those of the noble Viscount, or whether, if he retained them, he would declare that he did not intend to act upon them.
The Earl of Mintosaid, he was happy that the noble Marquess had discovered that the best means of obtaining an answer to a question was to put it in the presence of the person to whom it should be addressed; he certainly had not answered the question on a former occasion, because he was not in the House when it was put. With regard to the question itself, although he meant to give it a distinct and explicit answer, he must in the first place say, that as it regarded merely the private opinion of an individual Minister or Member of that House, he did not think it was one which any noble Lord was justly entitled to put; but having 553 said that, he begged to add, that neither the close argument, nor the eloquence of the noble Lord, nor his great authority, political or legal, had sufficed to wean him from his previous opinion. What he had before expressed it still remained; and accordingly, whatever weight that private opinion might have in the affairs, which came under his direction, their Lordships knew in what way it would operate. If any difference of opinion existed on the subject between himself and the noble Viscount, or any other noble Lord, he might regret it; but he must still venture to think that his own construction of the treaty was correct.
Lord Broughamsaid, the noble Earl's pertinacity in adhering to his opinion did not lessen his conviction of the palpable error of that opinion, or that by acting upon that opinion the noble Earl would be guilty of putting in peril the honour and reputation of this country, and the peace of Europe, by committing a most flagrant violation and outrage on one of the most solemn principles of international law. But if the noble Earl's perseverance in error had not increased his opinion of the noble Earl's wisdom, it had at least increased his opinion of the propriety of the division which he had pressed upon their Lordships the other night. For, notwithstanding that the First Lord of the Treasury entertained and expressed the sounder opinion, yet the First Lord of the Admiralty was the person who was to issue the orders, if any were to be issued at all, and the noble Earl now had stated, that in that erroneous opinion he still persisted. He would now only put a question to the noble Earl (Minto). There was no doubt that the argument which had been used the other night against the production of those orders was, that it might be very inconvenient to produce instructions that were of a contingent nature; but the argument could not always be used, and as the time must sooner or later arrive when no risk to the public service could be incurred, and when the contingency no longer existed, he hoped that then those instructions would be found to be in the ordinary official form, signed by two Lords of the Admiralty, and perhaps countersigned, so that then there might be no objection to their production.
§ The Duke of Wellingtonwas understood to say, that there was no ground for the apprehensions which the noble and 554 learned Lord had seemed to entertain, in consequence of the erroneous opinion of the noble Earl; for, as he had stated on a former occasion, although the private opinion of the First Lord of the Admiralty might be of importance, with respect to the business of minor consequence connected with that office, such was not the case with regard to great questions of policy, for then it must be the opinion of the whole Cabinet which was to direct the proceedings of Government; and the opinion of the noble Earl, whatever respect might be due to it, would not be entirely conclusive on the subject. As to the particular papers which had been moved for on that occasion, he begged to say, that the inclination of his mind was always to avoid, as far as possible, calling on the Government to produce papers of that nature. He did not think it was the practice of the House to do so; and he knew that sometimes serious injury resulted to the public service from the production of documents of that description which depended upon some contingency. He knew nothing as to giving confidence, or not giving confidence to the Government; but he did not think it right to call on the Government to give papers which he knew, if he were sitting on the other side of the House, he should not be inclined to produce. Such was the principle on which he generally acted; but he must confess that at first, when he had heard this paper defended by so important a Member of the Government as the noble Earl (Minto), and the particular officer who had carried it into execution, he did feel that it was necessary that the House should see the paper, because it went much farther than could have been expected. But then, when the noble Viscount came forward and said, that he did not concur in that opinion, but his (the Duke of Wellington's) opinion on the subject, he did not feel it to be his duty to press for the paper; but he reverted to his original intention when he came down to the House, which was, to vote against the granting of the papers.
Lord Broughamadmitted, that the general rule as laid down by the noble Duke was quite correct. But he considered that a case had been fully made out for an exception to that rule. The noble Earl had persisted in his error, and who knew whether it might not be now acted upon? Who knew that the noble Earl 555 might not overcome the noble Viscount? Would the noble Earl say, if the order was signed by the noble Earl himself alone, or by some other Member of the Government in conjunction with him?
The Earl of Mintosaid, that the question assumed, that such an order had been issued, which he had never admitted. The account of what had passed, which had been given by the noble Duke, seemed to him strictly accurate. The noble Duke had stated that which was known to all persons acquainted with official business—that whether the orders were issued or not, they could only be issued under the directions of a Secretary of State, and not upon the responsibility of the single Minister at the head of the Marines.
Lord Broughamsaid, that the noble Earl now chose to treat this order as not existing, but the inconvenience of producing it had been alleged to arise from its being a conditional order. Now if it did not exist, it could not he conditional, for nonentities were in their nature neither conditional nor unconditional. But as the noble Earl said, that he would not tell whether it was signed by himself alone, because he had never admitted the existence of the order at all, he begged to know whether he would object to give the date of any orders issued from the Admiralty to any cruisers whatever within the last four years, which were only signed by the First Lord of the Admiralty? No inconvenience to the public service could arise from such a return, because only the dates were to be given, and they would not occupy three lines.
The Earl of Minto. They would not occupy one line, because there was no such order that he was aware of.
The Marquis of Londonderrybegged to congratulate the noble Viscount, that he had been able so well to organize his forces, judging not only from the exhibitions in that House, but from specimens of another nature in another place. He regretted to see such exhibitions as were presented by the Government, in whose hands, unfortunately for the honour of the country, the administration of affairs was now placed. He only hoped, with regard to this difference of opinion between the noble Viscount and the noble Earl, that the opinion of the noble Earl at the head of the Admiralty might be kept under control; and that care would be taken that no instructions should be issued to 556 the cruizers on the Spanish coast, which might endanger the honour and peace of this country.
§ Subject dropped.