Lord Hardwicke, pursuant to notice, called the attention of the house to a transaction, during the discussion upon which some observations had lately been made upon his conduct, which he was conscious were wholly unfounded. The transaction he alluded to, was the removal of a Mr. Giffard from a place which he held in the revenue office in Ireland. He was only anxious to offer a candid statement of the matter, as it really stood, and that statement, he trusted, would fully vindicate his character, as far as it was implicated in this matter. The noble earl then observed, that he would not insist on reading extracts from the letters of the noble secretary of state on this subject, as that, he understood, would be objected to; but he believed he was. at liberty to read extracts from his own letters in answer to those of the noble secretary. The noble earl then read a variety of extracts from his correspondence in 1805, with the noble secretary (lord Hawkesbury), respecting the business of the catholic petition, and the measures which the Irish government was 1078 instructed to pursue, in order to prevent any irritation of the public mind upon that question. From these extracts it appeared, that the catholics held private meetings to concert the best mode of preparing and presenting their petition, the result of which they had never published. The whole of their meetings and proceedings were presided over by a noble lord (Fingal), to the candour, moderation, and temper of whose conduct, throughout the whole of this business, he should be ever happy to bear the testimony such conduct deserved. In order to give effect to the instructions of government, he had consulted with all the leading men in Dublin, and had their approbation of the measure he thought it prudent to adopt. The under-secretary of government had even been instructed to send a confidential person to Mr. Giffard, and to acquaint him with the wishes of his majesty's government respecting the catholic petition; more particularly specifying those wishes, by informing him, that no discussion should be agitated in Dublin on the question, until it had previously come before, and been decided on by parliament. Mr. G. had early and repeated admonitions on this point, but no consideration, he said, should deter him from giving "a licking to the papists." He accordingly made the most violent and offensive speeches in the common council of Dublin against the catholics, which were felt to be exceedingly injurious by the catholics, and which, in his opinion, were wholly irreconcileable with the wishes and instructions of government. In order to prove the sincerity of the wishes of the noble secretary, and in compliance with what he conceived to be his own duty, he removed Mr. G. from the situation he held under government, not however without repeated admonitions to desist from every inflammatory proceeding. It was true, that some time after, in May, the noble secretary expressed some regret at that measure, as it seemed to have given offence to some protestant Irish gentlemen then in England. Whether the opinions of those gentlemen were right or wrong he should not now enquire; -but he imagined that the situation he then held, afforded as fair an opportunity of judging of the situation of Ireland, as any of those gentlemen could possibly have had. He had interpreted the instructions of government in the best manner. his judgment enabled him to do; and he had not acted, 1079 as had been insinuated, with any harsh precipitation towards Mr. G. In order to prove these assertions, he should now move, "That there be laid before the house, extracts of the correspondence which took place between the noble secretary of state and himself, respecting the manner in which it was thought proper to act in Ireland with respect to the measure of the catholic petition."
Lord Hawkesburyacknowledged, that nothing could be more candid than the statement of his noble friend, but still he felt himself not bound to produce the correspondence moved for, because some of it was of a private nature, and because, it produced, it could answer no purpose. It was true, the conduct of his noble friend in displacing Mr. Giffard was looked upon as rather harsh by some of the protestant gentlemen in Ireland, and in this country: and indeed, when it was recollected what Mr. Giffard had suffered during the rebellion, and on other occasions, with respect to persons naturally most dear to him, these sufferings would carry with them some excuse for his intemperate behaviour.
Lord Grenvillehighly approved of the conduct of the noble earl, on that occasion, and thought that the statement he had just made, abundantly justified that conduct.—After a short explanation from lord Hawkesbury, lord Hardwicke withdrew his motion.
[ORDERS IN COUNCIL BILL.] On the motion for the, first reading of this bill,
Lord Grenvillesignified that he had an objection in form to any further proceeding in this measure. it was in direct contradiction to the standing order of the house, of 1702; and if their lordship's allowed that order to be infringed, there would be an end of their best privileges, and of their deliberative capacity. This the noble baron proceeded to shew from a variety of cases, and from the nature and necessity of the standing order to which he had referred.
Lord Hawkesburyconfessed that the objection was an important one, and that sufficient time should be allowed to take it into consideration. He thought, however, the bill should first be printed.
Lord Grenvillewould not object to the printing of the bill, but was of Opinion that the debate which had arisen on his objection to the form of the bill should be adjourned to Wednesday.—This suggestion was, acquiesced in.