HC Deb 16 February 1810 vol 15 cc440-67

The House having resolved into a Committee, on his Majesty's Message, relative to the grant of an Annuity of 2,000l. per annum to lord viscount Wellington,

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

rose, and said, that in consequence of his Majesty's most gracious Message, recommending to that House, the grant of a pension to lord Wellington, it would not be necessary for him to trespass long upon the time of the Committee, in order to impress them with the propriety of adopting the motion he had to propose. He could certainly not anticipate any objection to that motion, which would have the effect of inducing the House to withhold its concurrence; but in order to render the grounds upon which his motion was founded more clear, he should, in the first place, state to the Committee the circumstances under which it was brought forward; and unless that House should be prepared to depart from its uniform and established practice in all similar cases, he was persuaded it would not dissent from the proposition with which he should conclude. The facts were these: his Majesty, as soon as the intelligence had been received of the brilliant, glorious, and decisive victory of Talavera, had conferred upon the gallant officer who commanded in that memorable action, the honour of a title—an honour to which all those who devoted their talents and lives to military pursuits, looked up with the most ardent and laudable anxiety—an honour, the proudest distinction that can be conferred on a brave soldier, the highest object of his generous ambition; and at the same time the best reward of eminent services. In conferring this mark of his royal approbation and favour, his Majesty had thought it right to recommend by his Message to parliament, that it should be accompanied by a grant of some pecuniary pension, in the same manner as was usual in all such cases. In considering the propriety, and estimating the justice of the advice which had been given to his Majesty in both instances, it might perhaps be proper to confine the House to the simple consideration of the distinguished and exalted merit of the noble viscount upon the particular occasion. But it would neither be just to his Majesty nor to lord Wellington, that this should be looked upon in the same light as the case of an officer for the first time presenting himself, by his services, to the notice of his sovereign and the admiration of his countrymen. In estimating the claims of lord Wellington to the distinction conferred upon him, and the provision proposed to accompany it, they should look to what he had been—consider his past conduct, and derive, from his former distinguished services, strong accessary grounds of claims for his present honours and rewards. But tried even by the test of his late services, how did that gallant officer present himself to his sovereign and his country? He had, by the glorious operations he had conducted, and the victories he had achieved, he could not say raised, but certainly most eminently sustained the military renown of the army, and the unfading lustre of the British name and character. He presented himself to his Majesty, as the distinguished commander, who had already extended the glory of the British arms over the peninsula of India: he presented himself as the conqueror of Soult—and the general, who by the signal victories he gained in Portugal, expelled the French from that country, and rescued a kingdom, the rightful inheritance of our ally, from the grasp of the enemy. In short, he presented himself to his Majesty with such an accumulation of merits—such an aggregate of eminent services—such an unvaried career of victory and triumph, as could not fail to obtain for him the most signal mark of his Majesty's favour, and the unlimited gratitude of his country.—Looking, therefore, to all these considerations; looking also to the Vote of Thanks, which had been recently passed by that House, and which must be considered as expressive of its sentiments, he could not suppose any serious objection could be made to his motion. The Vote of Thanks, he must admit, had encountered some opposition; yet the general sense of the House was so strongly and decisively in its favour, that those with whom the opposition originated had not thought it right to come to a vote, conscious that their numbers would not be sufficient to make any impression on the House or on the country. If the House, therefore, did not disapprove of that Vote, if on the contrary it had been carried with a feeling almost unanimous and universal, what more was required as the foundation for his motion? Was there an instance upon record that would justify parliament in refusing the grant of the pension proposed? The amount of that pension was 2,000l. a year to lord Wellington, to descend to his two next heirs in succession on whom the title may devolve. This provision was no more than had been granted to lord Lake; it was precisely the same as the pension that had been granted to lord Hutchinson; precisely the same as had been settled upon lord Duncan; precisely the same as was given to lord Collingwood; precisely the same as had been settled upon the relict of general sir Ralph Abercromby. Whatever might be the disposition of other gen- tlemen, it was not his intention or his wish to take upon him the invidious and ungracious office of entering into idle comparisons; but if the task were imposed upon him, he could assure the hon. gentlemen opposite, that he would have no cause to shrink from performing it. Upon the strength of the instances to which he had adverted, he should rest the defence of the proportion of pension which he meant to propose. Many other cases, he had no doubt, could be produced in justification and support of the amount of the intended grant, which would shew that it was a provision in extent consistent with the uniform practice of parliament in rewarding the services of distinguished officers. He would defy any gentleman to shew any case to the contrary; unless, perhaps, in the instance of officers of considerable opulence, to whom the amount of the provision must have been of less value than the honours of the peerage. Upon what ground any opposition could be made to the grant of the pension in this case, he was therefore at a less to conceive. Was it on the ground of economy that it was to be refused? Were gentlemen then prepared to say, that on the occasion of such services, such grants as that under consideration should be refused upon such a ground? What principle of narrow economy ought to be suffered to arrest the grant of such pensions and rewards, as were calculated not alone to recompense past services, but to kindle an active emulation in every branch of the public service, and call forth the most strenuous exertions and honourable ambition of gallant and enterprising individuals? Nothing could be a more powerful incitement to zeal, activity, and exertion than the prospect of such distinction as had been conferred upon lord Wellington. But the bare title was not sufficient, unless accompanied by some adequate provision in the form of a pension. To withhold the pension, therefore, he contended, would be injurious to the individual—injurious to the public service, and inconsistent with the justice and liberality of parliament. A niggardly economy in a case like the present would be worse than the most indiscriminate prodigality; and it would be even an injury to the constitution to grant such honours, without taking care that an allowance should be made to support the dignity of the persons on whom they were conferred. Having said enough in his opinion to impress the Committee with the propriety of the grant, he should not trespass longer on their time, but move, "That it is the opinion of the Committee that a pension of 2,000l. per annum be settled on lord viscount Wellington, and on the two next heirs to his title in succession, &c." On the question being put on this motion,

Mr. Howard

rose and spoke against the motion, on the ground that the battle of Talavera was followed by none of the consequences of victory, and rather displayed ill-judged rashness on the part of lord Wellington, than deliberate and skilful valour. He contrasted the battle of Talavera with lord Nelson's decisive victory at Aboukir, for which that great man was only raised to the peerage; with a pension only equal to what was now proposed. How different were the two battles! The hon. gent. dwelt strongly on the impropriety of the advance of the army to Talavera, and urged the retreat and disasters which followed the action, as grounds for withholding the pension.

Mr. Calcraft

observed, that the able speech of the hon. gent. who preceded him, had rendered it unnecessary for him to go as much at length, as he had intended, into the consideration of the question. He congratulated that hon. gent. and the House, on the accession of eloquence and talents which it acquired in that hon. gent. Though what he had to say might not coincide with the sentiments of the majority of that House, nor with the sense of the public, yet no consideration of that kind should deter him from doing what he considered to be his duty. The right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer had asserted, that because his Majesty had been advised to advance lord Wellington to the peerage, it would be a deviation from the uniform practice of that House not to add to that honour the grant of a pension. Surely the right hon. gent. could not think of making any comparison between the services of lord Wellington and the services of the distinguished officers to whose cases he had referred, in order to justify the amount of pension proposed to be granted. He could never think to compare the battles of Talavera with the victories of Nelson. Did the right hon. gent. mean to say, that the claims of lord Wellington were equal to those of Sir Ralph Abercrombie, who closed a long life of eminent and meritorious service, by crowning it with a signal and brilliant victory? For himself he could not consider either of the actions for which lord Wellington was to be rewarded, as a victory, neither had been followed by any of the consequences of success, neither had they any one characteristic of victory; but, on the contrary, both exhibited every symptom of a defeat! Examine the battle of Talavera. Did you advance? Did you not, on the contrary, retreat in the most disgraceful manner, and under the most calamitous circumstances? Did you not leave at Talavera one tenth part of your army? As to the amount of loss in battle, that could be no proof of victory or defeat. But he should ever contend, that the advance of lord Wellington to a situation in which his army was in danger of starving, unless he should fight against superior numbers, or make a disgraceful flight, was a great military error. The battle had not been of his choice. He was obliged to fight; and if it had not been for the steadiness, bravery, and discipline of the columns which he sent forward to support the advanced divisions, he could never have escaped with an army. Would any gentleman look to the circumstances of that day's action—would any one look to its immediate consequences—would any one look to what was the state of the army at present, and say that a victory had been gained at Talavera? It was in truth no victory. It had been swelled into a victory only by the influence of political connection in order to get lord Wellington advanced to the peerage. It was a piece of ministerial foppery. It was an object with the right hon. gent. opposite (Mr. Canning), and his Majesty's ministers, to obtain the support of marquis Wellesley, and consequently they were anxious to pay court to that noble lord. He would congratulate, not the right hon. gent. (for he was no longer in office) but his Majesty's ministers, on having secured to themselves the support of that noble lord. But still he must contend, that it was with a view to pay court to him that lord Wellington had been advanced to the peerage; and that it was now proposed to add a pension to that honour. If they were to look to the history of the country for examples in which such honours and rewards were conferred, they would not find a single case of a peerage or a pension granted upon such disputable grounds. It was not his wish to detract from the merits or services of lord Wellington, either in India or in Europe: but he did not think they were such as merited the distinctions conferred upon him. He was as ready as any gentleman to admit that lord Wellington was a brave, active, gallant and enterprising officer, that he had behaved very With his services in India, was not sufficiently acquainted; but one thing he was sure of, that they had rewarded themselves; as there was commonly something behind much better than the mere remains of hard knocks, which were the only reward of many of those who achieved victories in Europe. But in the services performed by lord Wellington in Europe he could not discover any thing to merit the honours he had received, or the provision now proposed to be settled upon him, and his two next heirs in succession. With the grant of the peerage, that House had certainly nothing to do. He was sorry the title had been conferred, but for that there was now no remedy. That the thanks of that House had been voted to lord Wellington, was most true. But that such a vote should be advanced in support of the grant of a pension, excited his surprise. Did the right hon. gent. not remember the manner in which he had introduced the motion for that Vote of Thanks? Had he forgotten the cold and frigid manner in which he had prefaced that motion? The right hon. gent. was, perhaps, on that occasion not disposed to go further, though since he might have discovered something to quicken his feelings and make him warmer on the subject. For his part, he had not given any opposition to the Vote of Thanks. He had always thought that the conduct of lord Wellington in the battle of Talavera had been that of a brave, nay more, of a skilful and able officer, and for that reason it was that he had not opposed the Vote of Thanks. But was it, therefore, to follow that such distinguished honours should be conferred on so young an officer? What more could lord Wellington have received, if he had eminently distinguished himself in several campaigns, if he had grown old in arduous service like the late sir Ralph Abercrombie, and closed a life of professional labour in the arms of a signal victory? What had lord Nelson received for the glorious victory at Aboukir, which gave to this country the French fleet, and the army that had overrun Egypt? He would assert, without fear of contradiction, that if the victory of Aboukir had not been gained, we should neither have destroyed the French fleet nor expelled the French army from Egypt. Yet what had that illustrious hero got for such a splendid victory, which led to such important consequences? He was made a baron, with a pension of 2,000l. a year.—He was ready to make allowance for the feelings by which gentlemen might be actuated on this subject; but setting aside those feelings, would any gentleman compare the services of lord Wellington with those of lord Nelson? Was it possible that such a comparison could be made, or could any man of sound mind and unimpaired faculties conceive any reason why the same rewards should be conferred for very dissimilar services?—The battle of Vimiera was, however, pressed into the cause, and made in part the ground of the intended grant. But had not that battle given to Junot and the French army the only chance they could have had of maintaining themselves in Portugal?—But it was said that this grant ought not to be resisted on the ground of a narrow economy. Under suitable circumstances; where great services might have been performed, even though the situation of the country was more embarrassed, he should never, upon any such paltry principle of economy, think of objecting to the grant of an adequate pension. But in ail cases where the merit of the services was doubtful, he thought that maxims of public economy ought to be most particularly attended to. He was sorry the peerage had been granted; but as that House had nothing to do with that subject, he thought they ought not to add to it the pension. Ministers, instead of a pension, might have given to lord Wellington a lucrative military government; they might have given him one of those places of profit which were constantly becoming vacant, and ought to do so rather than take this pension from the purses of the people. But no; they had other claimants for such good things.—The right hon. gent. had indulged in some exultation because the former question had not been pressed to a division; but he doubted whether that right hon. gent. had much reason to triumph on the result of divisions. For his own part, he doubted much whether public opinion was with the right hon. gent. on that or the present occasion; but whatever might be the case now, he was convinced that it would not be with him a month hence, when the whole fruits of lord Wellington's victories and campaigns would develope themselves to public view. He was sorry and alarmed to hear that lord Wellington had declared that he could defend Portugal with 50,000 men, provided 30,000 of them were British troops. All he knew was, that if the French were in earnest in their design upon Portugal, before three months lord Wellington and his army would be in England. Would to God they were in England at this moment! If Portugal were to be defended by him, he was afraid that they would have to deplore some such ruinous and bloody victories as that of Talavera, which would terminate in the loss of Portugal. Neither Portugal nor any other country could be defended by victories like that of Talavera.—Mr. Calcraft then adverted to certain inaccuracies in the dispatches of lord Wellington, particularly respecting the Spanish army, and contended that had not the Spaniards maintained their position on the right, our army must have been annihilated. Some of the Spanish troops had actually been engaged, as it appeared that they lost 1,200 men; and, therefore, to say that the British sustained the whole weight of double their own number, was a kind of Oriental style not consistent with British feelings. He allowed that the action on the Douro was a brilliant affair; but even in that there was room for much criticism.—On the whole, he did not think that any ground existed for the vote proposed. If lord Wellington should survive the scrapes into which he was constantly bringing his army, he might one day be entitled to distinction and rewards. If he had destroyed the French armies under Soult and Ney, what more could he have expected than what was now proposed to be done for him? Were the lives of the slain soldiers not to be considered? Lord Wellington engaged in a battle, in which he lost nearly a fourth of his army, and was compelled to make a disgraceful retreat leaving his wounded behind, and yet he was held up as a great military hero. That might be the opinion here; but he assured gentlemen it was not the general opinion elsewhere. They might vote pensions and thanks, but they could not permanently blind the country.

Mr. Robinson

was never more surprised than he was, first, at the opposition to the Resolution, and next to the mode in which that opposition was made. When gentlemen had the speech of his noble friend (lord Castlereagh) fresh in their recol- lection, and likewise the illustrations of two eminent general officers, and the manly, honest, and disinterested speech of the right hon. gent. opposite (Mr. Windham), the great friend of the army on all occasions, they could hardly have believed that statements would have been repeated which had then been so fully refuted. The opposition was made on the grounds of an invidious comparison between the merits of lord Wellington and those of other great military and naval heroes. He would not enter into these; but rest the case of lord Wellington on his own intrinsic merits. The hon. gent. had said, that many sentiments were uttered in that House, contrary to the common sense of the public. He admitted that, and referred to the hon. gent.'s speech as an instance. The hon. gent. had said, that if lord Wellington had closed a long life of service by a brilliant victory, as other officers had done, then he would have merited the same reward. But the argument was worth nothing, or rather it made against the hon. gentleman. Lord Wellington though young in years, was old in military glory. When posterity should look into the page of history, brightened with the names of Assaye, of Roleia, of Vimeira, of Douro, and of Talavera, they must look for their reward in the honours bestowed on the hero who led Britons to glorious victory on so many splendid, occasions.—The hon. gent. had under-rated the action of the Douro. By the operation on that river, lord Wellington forced Soult into such a situation, that he must either have fought a battle on the most disadvantageous terms, or have retreated by a road by which it was impossible to carry with him his baggage, ammunition, waggons, cannon, &c. Soult was a good officer undoubtedly, and chose the latter alternative, but as had been foreseen, he lost his baggage, cannon, &c. &c.—He denied the insinuation, that the language in Lord Wellington's dispatches was exaggerated or inflated. If, instead of applying to the hon. gent. the House could apply to the British army, assembled in one body; if they could apply to the enemy; if they could apply to the people liberated, by the skill and ability of the noble lord, and the steady discipline and valour of his brave army; they would tell them that not a cannon, not a carriage, nothing that constituted an army, escaped from this brilliant achievement. Yet this was denied to be a service, where the enemy fled with so much loss, that the roads were covered with his magazines, exploded; his mules, and beasts of burden, houghed or slaughtered; his carriages broken to pieces, and his men, who were unable to follow his army, left to be cruelly massacred by an enraged and justly exasperated peasantry. This was no service, no victory with the hon. gent., who, in the march from Talavera, could discover a retreat most disastrous and disgraceful.—The hon. gent. had then said, that the honours had been conferred, and that the pension was to follow, in compliance with the wishes of marquis Wellesley, and to secure his co-operation with the present ministry. But he asserted, without fear of contradiction, that if there was any man more anxious than another to confer honours and rewards upon lord Wellington, it was his noble friend (lord Castlereagh,) to whom the hon. gent.'s observations could not in the least apply. The honour and the reward had been deserved, and he would support the Resolution. He thought lord Wellington an honour to his country: he knew he was the boast of his contemporaries. Lord Wellington was honoured because he deserved honour, and he might say of him, as was finally said of Sir Ralph Abercromby, by lord Hutchinson, "His name is an honour to his country—it will meet the applause of his co-temporaries, and be embalmed in the recollection of a greatful posterity." Under these circumstances, he never in his life could give a vote with more pleasure than he would, this night, give it for a pension of 2,000l. to lord Wellington.

Mr. Lyttleton

thought that his hon. friend (Mr. Calcraft) went too far in saying lord Wellington might in time become an excellent officer. He had unquestionably given most convincing proofs of his already being not only an excellent but a distinguished officer. He had not met in the course of his connections with a single military man who had not agreed that lord Wellington was a very distinguished military character. With respect to the affair of Talavera, was it nothing to have stopped the progress of a large French army? was it nothing to have gained such an advantage over an army of twice the number of his own? He thought the merit of lord Wellesley deserved every praise; but if it came to be compared with that of lord Nelson at the battle of the Nile, the capture of the French fleet, and the consequent expulsion of the French from Egypt, the comparison must fall very far short indeed. Sir Ralph Abercromby finished his career of life by a splendid victory which had been rewarded by the greatful acknowledgments of his country to his posterity.—Lord Wellington had, he hoped, many years of fortunate ability and professional distinction to go on with; which would hereafter entitle him to the gratitude of his country. Much had been said in that House on the subject of party; he was willing to acknowledge he was a party man; he would always support a party whose conduct should be directed to the support of the vital interests of the country; but he thought nothing could, in the end, prove more injurious to those interests, than an unjust or merited distribution of national honours. He, for his own part, expected nothing from ministers; would receive nothing from them; and his earliest hope and wish were, that the House would compel them to do their duty to their country. Highly, however, as he admired and respected the military talents and character of lord Wellington, he could not give his assent to the present motion.

General Craufurd

thought himself called upon to make a few observations. With respect to the operation on the Douro, lord Wellington had most judiciously pressed upon Soult, for the purpose of forcing him to fight on very disadvantageous terms, or to retreat with great loss, and his retreat was actually attended with the loss of his baggage, cannon, &c. and 5 or 6,000 men. His hon. friend (Mr. Calcraft) was under a complete mistake as to the real object of the operation. If lord Wellington had not pressed so hard upon Soult, the consequence would have been, not as his hon. friend imagined, the intercepting of Soult by general Beresford, but the allowing him to escape without any loss at all; for Soult was not so blind as to have remained in his position till general Beresford could have been prepared to intercept him. The consequences that followed lord Wellington's operation there, were equal to those that would have followed from a very considerable defeat of the enemy's army. As to the retreat from Talavera, he observed, that lord Wellington never intended to have advanced beyond Talavera till circumstances were changed or a decisive oppor- tunity presented itself. He had taken up the position at Talavera, and had de-defended it successfully. Under no circumstances however, he must repeat, with Soult coming down as he did, could he have gone further; the Spanish army did not at that time advance to take a share in the action against Soult; but if Cuesta had kept his position, Soult must have been defeated. Cuesta had 14,000 men, and lord Wellington 18,000; then would have been not only the victory of Talavera, but the defeat of Soult. Lord Wellington had foreseen and provided for every thing that had happened during this arduous campaign. Lord Wellington had been adored in every country which had been the seat of war, and was it only in his own country he should be refused a reward? If the question of his great merits was put to the army, they would, in support of them, almost fall down and enthusiastically worship him. He deprecated the practice of undervaluing the campaign of lord Wellington by insiduous comparisons with those of other great heroes, who stood in the list of British fame. He thought it was highly invidious. He was convinced, no action redounded more to the honour of the country than that of Talavera. Why, then, should not lord Wellington have this pension? It had been said, that he had served in India, and that was a profitable service. He did not, however, believe him to be a rich man. He believed that, as the hon. gent. (Mr. Calcraft) had said of lord Lake, he had many debts previous to his going to India, and what money he got there might have gone to pay these; so that he thought a peerage might be an incumbrance without a pension. Never did he more heartily concur in any vote than in this for 2,000l. a-year.

Mr. Barham

considered the conduct of lord Wellington, in dashing precipitately forward into Spain, and being thence obliged to fight the battle of Talavera, as a contradiction to all the military principles set down in the history of the most military nations of the world. He was by no means inclined to estimate talent or services, by the direct success or failure of an object; but in viewing the battle of Talavera, he could not overlook that precipitancy in the commander, which made victory unprofitable, and must have made defeat total ruin: for when it was acknowledged, that the success at Talavera only led to consequent calamity, the House must be aware that failure and defeat must have produced the annihilation of the British army. In the present instance, when reward for exploits was solicited, the House was bound to bear in mind, that the very term 'reward' comprehended both merit and success. Before this vote for a pension was acquiesced in, it was right to ascertain, whether lord Wellington, in his advance to Talavera, had acted in compliance with positive instructions, or not. Were the House in possession of that knowledge, it would then be able, when it praised for services, also to know whom to censure for such services being wholly unavailable to the interests of the country. Should the House forget what were its duties, the country would not fail to determine upon the merits or demerits of such transactions. And it was no very ordinary circumstance to observe that whilst the country from one extremity to the other was calling for inquiry, the organ which was to express its feelings were accumulating thanks, and honours, and pensions upon the parties engaged in those questionable occurrences. It was most improper to assume, that, merely because the crown conferred a peerage, therefore the House of Commons was necessarily bound to grant a pension. If such doctrine as that was to be brought into practice, then it must follow, either that the House of Commons must one time or other trench upon the prerogative of the Crown, or that the prerogative would destroy the best privileges of the Commons. The people in such a state would not fail to demand an account of all those indigested and calamitous plans in which the ministry involved them—plans, of the success of which no rational hope could be entertained, and for whose adoption there could be no other apology, but that they were undertaken by men anxious to compensate for their weakness by their multiplicity. The hon. member concluded by declaring his intention to oppose the motion.

Mr. Herbert

estimated the value of the battle of Talavera by the impression it had made on the enemy, as expressed in the Moniteur. He was glad that lord Wellington had advanced into Spain; and therefore he could not but consider that blood as well shed which enhanced the reputation of the country, and belied the assertions of our enemy, uniformly cast upon this nation, of being wholly occupied in promoting selfish objects. With respect to the retreat of our army after the battle of Talavera, it was to be recollected, that after the two most memorable victories in our history, namely, Agincourt and Dettingen, the British triumphant armies had retreated.

General Loftus

bore testimony to the military talents of the noble lord. Valour, he was not inclined to account more than a common merit in such an army, and amongst such soldiers as ours, but skill, and discipline, and patience were to be found among the characteristics of this general. Lord Wellington, he believed also was far from rich; he had always been one of the most liberal men that ever existed, and the state of his circumstances was, he imagined, far from adequate to the support of the high dignity to which he was elevated.

Lord Milton

said, that though the thanks of the House constituted one of the highest honours they could confer, they were now called on to give a further proof of their approbation. According to this doctrine, the king had nothing to do but to grant a peerage at his discretion, and then demand of the House to vote a pension. At the time this peerage was granted, the noble general had a near relation, high in office, and he supposed it was intended for the gratification of his feelings, as much as for the eminent services said to be performed, that title had been conferred. In former times, much greater services had been performed, and much less rewards granted; but he supposed these honours and rewards were granted rather for the purpose of shedding a lustre on the present administration, than for any very extraordinary merit in the conduct of the person to whom they were given. This was not his reason for opposing it; but seeing nothing in the conduct of lord Wellington, that, in his opinion, entitled him either to a peerage, or the thanks of that House, he would protest against voting him a pension of 2,000l. a-year, to be drawn out of the pockets of the people.

Sir F. Burdett

said, that there was one circumstance, which, to him, appeared to render the vote, upon the present occasion, particularly objectionable; but, before he proceeded to state it, he should notice some observations that had fallen from an hon. friend of his, upon the subject of party. His hon. friend had declared himself favourable to party; and as it was generally attributed to him (sir F. Burdett) that his ideas were different, he hoped he would be permitted to state, in toe present instance, what his notions upon that subject were. He was not averse from party in all its shapes, though it had frequently fallen to his lot to disapprove of it, under different modifications, in which it was presented to his notice; party, founded upon public grounds, and with a view to public good, he approved of; it was calculated to benefit the country; but party, founded upon self-interest, and directed only to the attainment of place and pension, he would never approve of; it was calculated to ruin the country. That was the particular description of party of which he disapproved. The hon. member (Mr. Herbert) who had lately spoken, seemed to think that the battle of Talavera was important, only because it was calculated to do away the Sarcastic injurious remarks of the French emperor; but he could not believe that the character of the country, or of its army, was, indeed, sunk so low, as to render the escape from sarcasm of such importance, as to compensate for the havoc of that day.—A comparison had been instituted between the battle of Talavera and the battles of Dettingen and Agincourt; but there was no resemblance whatever between them; besides, he did not hear that either of them was followed up by pensions. The battle of Agincourt was occasioned by the successful entrance of the british army into the French territories; and, though we retreated afterwards, it was a retreat in which much booty was carried off, and great glory was derived from the battle to the British name. In the present case, the advance was injudicious, the retreat was precipitate and confused; and, instead of bringing off booty, we had left our wounded behind us, to the mercy of the enemy. But an hon. gent. had mentioned the liberality of lord Wellington as a ground for agreeing to the motion; that surely could not be allowed to be a claim to the vote which ministers demanded. If lord Wellington's liberality had brought him into difficulty, or debt, who was it they called upon to free him from the incumbrance? The people—who already owed debts enough, and owed them, not in consequence of any prodigality of their own, but by, and in consequence of, the impositions of their representatives. Surely, when such was the case, they ought to be cautious, that not a sixpence should be demanded, with- out establishing the claim of a strong necessity. With respect to the military part of the question, he had no opinion; he could only say, that the result was failure,—failure as complete as failure could be.—The advance to attack was made upon the part of our general; the object was to drive back the French; instead of which, after, certainly, a splendid display of courage and bravery on the part of the British troops, our army retired itself. Might he not say with justice of this, that it was not one of those decisive victories which called for the honours and rewards in the gift of that House, and of the nation at large. But even if he was inclined to agree in the propriety of granting a reward to lord Wellington, he should object to making any appeal for that purpose to the people's purse. He wanted to know what was become of the patronage of the government? Whenever gentlemen talked of doing away sinecures and pensions altogether, the defence always was, that services must be rewarded, that the system of sinecures and pensions afforded a fund for that purpose, and who would take away a system so favourable to that reward? But as soon as services were performed, the application was made to the people, and not to that fund, which one would imagine, from the arguments of the gentlemen opposite, they were preserving for the reward of merit alone—There was a place now or lately vacant, to which ministers might have appointed lord Wellington, that of governor of Portsmouth; there was, perhaps, another place at their disposal at that moment which he should then abstain from naming, but to which they might, perhaps, have appointed him. It was, indeed, wonderful, that, with greater means of rewarding merit, than all the combined merit and deserts of Europe could possibly exhaust, they were perpetually throwing the burden upon the people. For all these reasons, but principally for the last one, he should oppose the motion.

Mr. Fuller

said, that the hon. baronet had given a strange reason for opposing the motion, that he knew nothing about military matters. He could not bear to hear, that one who had won fourteen battles, should be refused such a paltry consideration.—What would this country say—what would the common soldiers say—when they found that we made all this talk about conferring upon him the distinctions to which be was so eminently entitled. Why should they talk about such things? Why should they oppose him, because his brother was a Secretary of State? He was sorry that any British subject should oppose a man, who was perhaps as great a hero as Belleisle, or any other that could be mentioned. An hon. gent. had said, that he sought no place; but if that hon. gent's abilities were observed, and considered to be useful, he would probably have no objection to be offered one. He would beg leave to give him a piece of advice, and that was, that if he spoke one way, and voted another, by G—d neither would employ him. (Loud laughing, and cries of order! order!)

Lord A. Hamilton

did not mean to deny merit to lord Wellington, but he would say, that his merit was not of such a nature as to deserve such high honours. This was a question of a mixed nature, in part military, and in part prudential, If, upon investigation, it appeared that an officer had led his troops into difficulties, either by his own rashness, or in consequence of the advice of others, he could deserve no thanks for having extricated them. As to any authority or sanction, which the approbation of Ministers might be supposed to give to such an act, it should be remembered, that the ministers who approved of this operation were the very same ministers who had fired the Tower guns for the convention of Cintra. He would ask, and he thought it was only putting the question upon its right footing, could any one rejoice that the battle of Talavera had been fought? Appeals had been made to their liberality; but they ought to consider that it was not their own money they were disposing of, and however liberally they might be inclined to act, if such was the case, they ought to adopt a different policy in the present instance, when economy was their most pressing and important duty.

Lord Desart

, spoke in very flattering terms of the military character of lord Wellington; in doing so, he said, he was certain that bespoke the sentiments of the army and even of the enemy himself There were some persons, he was sure, in the country, who would be willing, not only to refuse to support the dignity now granted to lord Wellington, but even to pull down all that was dignified and important in the country. The merits of the person in whose favour they were now applied to, did not rest on one victory; he was not a mere adventurer in search of re- putation, he had achieved great glory before ever he went to Spain: he had now received a high honour from his Sovereign, and he was certain that all would agree in the propriety of allowing him whatever was necessary to support the rank to which he was raised, unless such persons as were willing to reduce all dignity into a state of dependence upon their generosity. But not only had lord Wellington obtained repeated victories, he had obtained them all over superior numbers. Much had been said of rashness; that the undertaking of lord Wellington was difficult he admitted; but it was the characteristic of great minds to discern between difficulties and impossibilities, and that characteristic he had proved by the decisive success of the operation. The battle of Talavera was a great instance of military excellence, and as such should be marked with that distinguished notice with which it was the object of government to dignify it.

Mr. Whitbread

complimented the noble lord on his eloquence, but complained of the manner in which he had treated all those who differed from him in opinion on the present question. The noble lord spoke of persons disgracing themselves by opposing this pension, and attributed gross ignorance, or wilful blindness, to those who could not view the subject in the same light as he did; and spoke of a party who were crying down every thing that was dignified and respectable in the land. He would state for himself, that he never did generally cry down the military talents of lord Wellington as a general, but, on the contrary, had often professed great respect for them; and upon another occasion, the battle of Vimiera, he had most cordially joined in the vote of thanks. As to the particular subject under discussion, so far from this being taken up as a party question, many of those with whom he was generally in the habit of acting warmly approved both of the vote of thanks and the pension now proposed. He must, however, observe, that the charges against members of that House for acting with the spirit of party, came with a very ill grace from so young a member as the noble lord, and more particularly when it was considered that he had begun his political career by accepting a place from ministers, and consequently binding himself to their party and politics. Upon the subject of party in general, he agreed in the opinion which had been delivered by the hon. bart. (sir F. Burdett,) that it was right to act in concert with other men, for the attainment of any great public principles and objects; but at the same time that, in that sense of the word, he was content to be called a party man, yet when his duty obliged him to draw the line, he could detach himself from those with whom he was in general proud to concur. Another hon. gent. (Mr. Robinson,) had laid before the House the map of India and of Europe, and had led them from the north to the south, to witness the many achievements of the noble lord. He should, however, beg leave to bring them back again to the precise ground on which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had chosen to take his stand, and that was the battle of Talavera itself. Independent of the question, respecting the merits upon that occasion, there was another very important consideration, and that was, whether even supposing the peerage merited, the circumstances of lord Wellington were such as to require this pension? If they were not, it would be a scandalous profusion and waste of the public money. It was the peerage and not the pension, which was supposed to be given as the reward of military merit. It did net necessarily follow, however, that whenever his Majesty was advised to grant a peerage to any officer, the House of Commons was also bound to vote him a pension. As he had happened to touch upon the honour of the peerage, he would ask the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, did he not know that the peerage had been very much prostituted and degraded of late years? Did he not know that it had been offered to barter for support to ministers? Had not he himself lately offered the highest honours of it for the support of a man (lord Melville) whom he could not introduce into office? On this present occasion, ministers had conferred a double peerage on lord Wellington; and yet the immortal Nelson, for the battle of Aboukir, was only created a baron. He believed every one would allow, that the battle of Aboukir was much more glorious and decisive than that at Talavera; and if the former services of lord Wellington were to be thrown into the scale, he would ask, had not lord Nelson also performed great services, before he had been selected by his merit to command on that occasion? Was he any more an adventurer for reputation at that time than lord Wellington at Talavera? Had not he also achieved splendid exploits? Was not his shoulder, at that time, adorned with the red ribbon, and was not his body mutilated by honourable wounds received in his country's battles? Although the House could not controul the granting of peerages, still they were bound to controul the expenditure of the public money. In the case of earl St. Vincent, the pension was not given for a considerable time after the peerage; nor until it was ascertained that the circumstances of that noble lord were such as to require it. As to the situation of lord Wellington, there was nothing slated to the House which should induce them to presume that he was not able to support the honour of the Peerage. Had not he been to India, and in lucrative situations? If in his manner of living he had contracted debts which made him poor, he would agree with the hon. baronet (sir F. Burdett) in asking, has not the nation debts also? When this subject was brought before Parliament, they had two things to consider. The first was, whether the peerage was properly granted or not? and the second thing was, supposing that it had been properly granted, was the pension necessary or not? Now, as to the first point, he did think the peerage was not improperly granted; but that the double peerage was very improper. But even supposing the peerage was deserved, what occasion was there for coming to the people for money to support it? Had not the crown abundant means of rewarding services of this nature? Although he differed from many persons in his idea of the particular merits of the battle of Talavera, yet he thought highly of the general merits of lord Wellington as a soldier, and hoped that he would in future do services more important than those for which he was made a peer. He did not object to his being rewarded, but to the mode of rewarding him. What was the objection to the vacant government of Portsmouth being given to him? If it were said, that it was because he was liable to be sent out of the country, he would reply, that general Junot was governor of Paris at the time that he was fighting with lord Wellington in Portugal; and therefore there could be no serious objection to the governor of Paris being opposed by the governor of Portsmouth. There was another office, which it was very delicate to allude to; but which, as it had been already mentioned, and the circumstance was of great notoriety, he must advert to. A valuable office (the Tellership of the Exchequer) was now said to be in the hands of the Crown. Whom was this office to be reserved for? Was it for any person who now felt uneasy in his seat, and wished a comfortable sinecure to retire upon? It was often said, that the expectation of one of those great places falling in satisfied many a claimant. If so, why should not lord Wellington wait for one of them? He felt it his duty, as a member of Parliament, to enquire into the circumstances of lord Wellington, and to say, that if they were sufficient to support the honour of the peerage, it would be a scandalous waste of the public money to grant him the pension. A gallant general had stated that lord Wellington had foreseen every thing which had happened. If that was the case, lord Wellington would have been an absolute madman. If he had foreseen that the French would have attacked him with a great superiority of force; that the Spaniards would not give him the support which might have been expected; that he should finally be obliged to retreat, leaving his sick and wounded in the power of the enemy; and yet, foreseeing these things, had resolved to place himself in that situation, what could then be said of the battle of Talavera? If he had, at the same time, foreseen the difficulties of his retreat, the loss of near 1,200 men in a month in the marshes of Estremadura, the long inactivity to which his army was doomed, and the advance of the French through Seville upon Cadiz, and yet resolved upon running all these risks and suffering all these losses, his conduct would be entitled to any thing but praise. There were some circumstances, however, in the conduct of lord Wellington which he could not approve. Although in his account of the battle of Talavera, he seemed to make no account of the Spaniards, yet in that same dispatch, mention was made no less than five times of Spanish troops charging with the British. He believed it was also a fact, that the Spaniards lost 1,200 men in the battle, which shewed, that they were not entirely idle.—It did, also, appear to detract a little from his greatness of mind to characterize sir Robert Wilson as merely a partizan. That officer had undoubtedly been extremely active, and had rendered most important service. He could have wished that he had never turned author, but he believed him to be an excellent soldier. As to the military renown which our army had obtained at Talavera, he must say, that even military renown might be bought at too high a rate. We might even purchase gold too dear, and it was a pretty dear purchase to buy mere military renown with the loss of 5 or 6,000 men. The military character of this country was not so low as to require such sacrifices merely to shew that we can oppose the French. It appeared to him that lord Wellington had got his army into a prodigious scrape, and that they had brought him out of it most wonderfully. Lord Wellington was falsly described by many, as a persecuted man; he was, on the contrary, loaded with honours, esteemed and beloved by his army. In many respects he thought highly of the military character and talents of the noble lord, but he did not approve of his bringing his army into a situation when they were compelled to fight the battle of Talavera; and therefore he did not approve of the extravagant honours bestowed upon him on account of that battle, and he had already stated to the House the grounds upon which he felt it his duty to dissent from the pension.

Mr. Wellesley Pole

said, that he had not intended to have taken any part in the discussion, but he felt it necessary for him to give some explanation on points which the hon. gent. had very properly inquired into. He must allow, that the hon. gent. had taken up the subject very fairly and manfully, and that, while he discharged his public duty, he had not spoken of the noble lord in any manner which could hurt the feelings of those who thought most highly of him. The hon. gent. had, however, given a military opinion of the military merits of his noble relation. Now, upon this subject he would only say, that he was content to rest the military fame of lord Willington, on the opinion of the army in general, and on the opinion delivered in that House by a distinguished general, and the opinion formerly delivered in that House by a very gallant officer (gen. Ferguson), who had served under him. Resting then the military character of his noble relation on these grounds, he would say that he entirely agreed in the principle laid down by the hon. member, that, it did not follow that the House should grant a pension, although his Majesty had been advised to grant a peerage. He thought the hon. gent. was right in inquiring into the circumstances of lord Wellington; and he would agree with him that it would be a shameful waste of the public money to grant a pension, if lord W. were in possession of means to support the dignity of the peerage without it. In the first place, he must state that lord W. never did expect, or seek for, a peerage. He had never, even in conversation with his nearest friends, hinted at such a prospect or suggested such a wish, and, therefore, when his majesty had been advised to raise him to that rank, he, as his nearest relation in England, had the awkward task of chasing a title, without any document or hint of what title his brother would prefer. Having stated that the peerage was thus conferred on his brother, without his seeking for it, he should now state what was the state of his circumstances, from a letter of his written to him after he had obtained the title. When he came from India, he had 42 or 43,000l. Of this sum he had now about 40,000l., half of which, together with 6,000l. (her own fortune) was settled on lady Wellesley. The manner in which he made his money was as follows:—At the taking of Seringapatam, he got 5,000l. In the Mahrattah war 25,000l.—He also got 4,000l. from the court of directors for acting as civil commissioner in the Mysore, and about 2,000l. from government as arrears of pay, allowances, &c. These sums, with some interest, made the 43,000l. which he had brought from India, and of which he had not spent above 2 or 3,000l. since.

Mr. Whitbread

, in explanation, said that he never intended to charge lord Wellington with having contracted debts with extravagance; he only argued hypothecally, as supposing such a case to exist.

Mr. Pole

said, that it was in that manlier and in that spirit only that he had supposed him to speak.

Mr. Wilberforce

regretted extremely that the House should hesitate to accede to this proposition, or that any difference of opinion should have arisen respecting it. He would ask, whether it was possible that if lord Wellington had devoted the great talents which confessedly belonged to him to the profession of the bar, or to any other liberal pursuit in society, he would not have rendered them more productiye—infinitely more productive, than it appeared he had done by actively employing them in the service of his country? Could the country, then, be re- conciled to that House if it acted illiberally towards such a man? Such illiberality would, he conceived, in the present situation of the world, not only be unjust but impolitic. He begged of those gentlemen who were so ready to profess themselves strong party men in general, although, on particular occasions, they thought proper to disclaim party, to get rid of party feelings upon this occasion, and consider the real merit of the question. Lord Wellington, instead of those professions in which there was little to risk and much to gain, had chosen the profession of arms, which was pregnant with risk, and which led alone to danger and to fame. That fame this gallant officer had obtained; but would that House, representing the country which he served, leave him to enjoy that fame accompanied by want? Was it possible that an example would be presented so degrading to the character of the country, and so injurious to its interests, calculated as it must be, to damp the spirit of that army upon whose ardour and zeal the country had to rely for its safety?—The House was bound even upon principles of consistency, to adopt the motion. It would ill become them to incur the imputation of being prodigal of their praise and parsimonious of their money. The honours which were bestowed on lord Wellington would be a downright burthen, if the liberality of the country, or the munificence of the sovereign, did not supply the means of wearing such honours with dignity. He had been informed by persons who were competent judges, that there was not living a more perfect soldier than lord Wellington. That gallant officer, he was assured, was as forward to share the fatigues as he was the dangers of the troops under his command. His comprehensive mind embraced every department of the army under his command. He was truly the soldiers, friend. He attended to their comforts; he provided for their necessities, and he gained their confidence without forfeiting the esteem of the officers.

Mr. Lyttleton

, in explanation, declared, that he would never accept of a subordinate office, (A loud laugh!) A subordinate office, he would repeat, or any office under any administration, the principles and conduct of which he could not fully approve; a prospect which he thought very remote indeed.

Mr. Henry Smith

had as high an opinion of the valour of lord Wellington, as any other gentleman in that House; but he could not perceive how the battle of Talavera could be brought in competition with the great and glorious achievements obtained by lord Nelson and sir Ralph Abercromby. If the House did agree to the present question, he trusted they would bear in their consideration the death of gen. M'Kenzie, who fell in the battle of Talavera. He had hoped that the name of this great and meritorious officer would have been mentioned by some of the hon. gentlemen who had spoken before him. He had not brothers in the cabinet, and was forgotten; he was a soldier, without fortune, who had raised himself to the rank he held by merit. If the House were so lavish of their money, why not take into consideration the services of this brave and esteemed officer? He would take another opportunity of bringing the merits and claims of the relatives of this deceased meritorious officer before the House. He concluded by saying, that the proposition before the Committee should have his negative.

Mr. Windham

said, that this was a question that was not identified with that which they had before under discussion, that of the thanks of the House to lord Wellington. It did not follow that those who approved of honours being paid to lord Wellington, should agree with the present proposition. He was not one of those who thought they should. He was convinced of the merit of the noble general, and those that wished to detract from it, had nothing to oppose against it, but uncertain demerit. The early part of his campaign was marked with great merit. It was an able and excellent arrangement to attack Soult, and from which that general could not have escaped, if it had not been by accident, and that of a nature lord Wellington could not have foreseen. Marshal Beresford was dispatched, with an efficient force, by a circuitous route, to attack Soult in the rear, which would have effectually cut off his whole army; if it was not also for an accident that could not be foreseen, by the standing of a bridge, which lord Wellington had reason to believe was destroyed. Capt. Ward, an officer distinguished for his services, and who had a perfect knowledge of the Portuguese language, having relatives and friends natives of that country, was sent forward for the purpose; but, when he reached there, the magistrates and populace would not allow him to carry his orders into execution, and this officer, placed in a wood, had the mortification to see Marshal Soult retreating across the bridge he intended to destroy; lord Wellington, surely, could not be answerable for the conduct of the Portuguese magistrates, or the populace. Was it not a victory to oblige a separate corps to retreat, and prevent them from joining and combining with the main army of Spain?—He again took the opportunity of assuring the House, that it was not on account of the demerits of the noble lord, that he opposed the proposition. He thought that it was false economy that would keep back the reward of valour, or of military achievements; but what greater honour could they have bestowed on the noble general, if he had, by the battle of Talavera, decided the fate of Spain? If they lavished their honours thus, and he was to take two steps more, the Court Calendar would not contain him. Some allusions had been made as to those honours conferred on lord Nelson. He was of opinion, that that great and valiant man was not sufficiently rewarded; but he did not look upon comparisons as the true mode of rewarding valorious deeds.

Mr. Canning

said, on a former night he had the honour of following the right hon. gent. who had just sat down, and he perfectly approved of his arguments, but was sorry that on the present night he was obliged to hold a different opinion. He could conceive many cases in which the thanks of the House might be richly deserved and property bestowed, but in which it would be improper they should be followed by hereditary rank. He should also conceive a case, in which it might be proper to confer honours, and yet to withhold what were called the more solid marks of favor. The question then however was, whether there was that value in the services of the noble lord to merit not only the thanks of that House, but also the pension which it was proposed to annex to the title his Majesty had conferred on him. In the course of the debate, comparisons had been frequently made between the battle of the Nile and the battle of Talavera. It had been asked, in a tone of triumph: why have you given two steps in the peerage to lord Wellington, when lord Nelson, for the proudest victory that adorns your naval annals, only obtained a barony? To this he would answer, that it was then, as it is now, his opinion that lord Nelson had not been sufficiently rewarded on that occasion. He thought that lord Nelson deserved an higher honour; but he would not degrade the honours of lord Wellington, to meet the scanty portion which that noble admiral had obtained. Should the flag of France, which for years had not been able to look that of England in the face, by any hazard obtain a partial victory, or even offer a successful resistance, would the person at the head of the government of that country be blamed for exalting the admiral who should acquire it to a dukedom or principality, or any other transcendant dignity. Let the House consider, that it was only two years ago that it was said within those walls, that we could never meet France in the field with an army. The battles of Roleia and Vimiera—the operations against Soult—the glorious conflict at Talavera—disproved this imputation upon our valour and spirit. They had re-established our military character and retrieved the honour of the country, which was before in abeyance.—If the system of bestowing the peerage was to be entirely changed, and the House of Lords to be peopled only by the successors to hereditary honours, lord Wellington certainly would not be found there. But he would not do that noble body the injustice to suppose that it was a mere stagnant lake of collected honours, but that it was to be occasionally refreshed by fresh streams. It was the prerogative of the crown to confer the honour of the peerage; it was the duty of that House to give to honour independence. The question was, whether they would enable lord Wellington to take his seat with the proudest peer in the other House, or whether they would send him there with the avowed intention that it was only to the crown he was to look for support. It was their duty to take care if the crown made a peer, that it should not make a generation of peers wholly dependent on its favours for their support. If the war was to be prosecuted, we had a proud assurance in the talents and services of lord Wellington, and the bravery of our armies, that we were competent to contend with the enemy on his own element; if peace were to be established, we should come out of the war with the consciousness of having obtained not a partial triumph, as it was said, bat complete and unqualified glory.

The question being loudly called for, the House divided. Ayes 213, Noes 106, Majority for the grant 107.