HC Deb 28 April 1814 vol 27 cc575-6
Sir Robert Heron

expressed a wish to lay before the House duplicates of certain letters which had been received from the West Indies with respect to those transactions in the West Indies which had within a few days become the subject of conversation in that House. He was not present on Monday, when the conduct of general Ainslie, relative to these transactions, had been animadverted upon; but he lamented the censure, and deprecated any decision upon the character of an officer high in his Majesty's service on mere rumour or ex parte statement. His object was correspondent with justice, in endeavouring to remove, by the production of these papers, any injurious impression which the censure or charges alluded to were calculated to produce upon the public mind. He could not, indeed, allow the character of a distinguished officer to be sullied by a mere impeachment without evidence. The charges advanced against this officer were not, he hoped, brought forward upon light ground. For himself he would say, that if this officer, or any person in authority, were found to oppress those whom he was bound to protect, that officer or person should never find a defender in him. But it happened, as he understood, that several documents respecting the case had been intercepted or lost, in their conveyance from the West Indies; and it was therefore wished, with a view to the elucidation of general Ainslie's conduct, that duplicates of the letters received by Mrs. Ainslie upon the subject should be laid before the House; with which wish he (sir Robert) now proposed to comply.

The Speaker

observed, that such a proceeding was inadmissible. It was competent for any member to move for the production of any papers that he thought proper; but no member could, of his own mere will, lay any papers before that House. The hon. baronet might, however, go on with the statement of his case, if he had any motion in view.

Sir R. Heron

stated, that from the letters he had alluded to, it would appear that the flogging which seemed to form the chief ground of complaint was inflicted upon a run-away slave, who was a Frenchman by birth, and who had been guilty of theft.

Mr. Creevey

considered the hon. baronet's perseverance in this sort of statement as quite irregular, unless he meant to terminate in some motion, because the hon. baronet (sir H. Mildmay) who had originally brought the business before the House, would otherwise be prevented from replying.

Sir R. Heron

said, that he did not wish to press the matter farther at present; but he hoped that that House and the country would suspend its judgment upon the charges against general Ainslie, until the whole of the case were investigated, and its merits fully ascertained.

Sir H. Mildmay

thought it right to correct an error in the statement of the hon. baronet, for he had brought forward no charges whatever against general Ainslie; but having seen statements in the public papers, containing the most serious charges against the conduct and character of that officer, he felt it his duty to put certain questions, and to move for the production of documents in that House, with a view to the elucidation of those charges.

Forward to