§ Mr. Whitbreadbegged to know if a treaty, which was not then ratified, and could not consequently be produced, but which had been required from the noble lord as early as July last, and several limes since, would be laid upon the table before the debate 114 on Wednesday. Being then on his legs, he also begged to be informed, whether Government had received any intelligence respecting the landing of Buonaparté in France.
Lord Castlereaghreplied, that he would endeavour to produce the treaty of Chaumont before Wednesday. As to the second question, it was true that Government had received information that Buonaparté had landed in France.
§ Mr. Whitbreadhoped that the noble lord would produce the treaty on Monday: it contained many matters of importance to the discussion. He hoped that it would turn out that the conduct of Great Britain had been perfectly correct, and that our allies had been equally immaculate in the preservation of their plighted faith.
Lord Castlereaghdid not think it right now to reply to any insinuations, if they were intended. The treaty might not be ready before Monday, but at any rate the substance was sufficiently known.
§ Mr. Whitbreadremarked that he hoped the treaty would be forthcoming; the House had voted supplies upon the faith of the ratification of that convention.
Lord Castlereaghobserved, that it would not be a greater stretch to argue upon the substance of the treaty than to vote public money upon it.
§ Mr. Tierneyobjected to the noble lord, that he made a sort of favour of that which the House had a right to demand; it was the duty of every minister to lay a treaty on which money was voted upon the table the moment it was ratified. He demanded the treaty.
Lord Castlereaghsaid that he was not aware that he had provoked language of that imperious kind. Ministers, without being influenced, would pursue that course which had hitherto secured to them the approbation of the House and of the country. Such terms did not become so sagacious and experienced a member. He would take measures to procure the treaty, but surely the substance would answer fully all the purposes of argument.
§ Mr. Whitbreadcomplained of the contemptuous manner in which the noble lord thought fit to treat members. Ministers had secured the vote of money, and now Parliament might obtain the vouchers as they could. He contended that the confidence shewn by Parliament in voting the public money, demanded a different return. The documentary evidence was absolutely necessary; and he 115 was sorry that the noble lord required to be urged, not only to give this piece of information, but the whole explanation regarding his important mission. He inquired what money had been paid under the treaty?
§ Mr. Whitbreadsaid that the intelligence gave him great satisfaction; and after a few words from lord Castlereagh, the subject was dropped, on an understanding that, if possible, the treaty should be laid upon the table.
§ Mr. Wilberforcewished to know whether the noble lord would give the House some intimation of what had passed at the Congress on the subject of the abolition of the slave trade?
Lord Castlereaghsaid that on Wednesday next, among other information, he should state what had passed on that interesting subject.
Mr. Ponsonbysaid that if, on Wednesday, it was intended to call for any opinion on the conduct of the noble lord, he, for one, should not give any opinion without documents having been laid before him. He should lay in his claim, both for time and authentic documents, before he could come to any decision on the subject.
Lord Castlereaghsaid he perfectly concurred with the right hon. gentleman. What he should do on Wednesday was, to give a general outline of the business at the Congress, and not to call for any decision on his conduct.