Lord Castlereaghappeared, at the bar of the House with a Message from his royal highness the Prince Regent, which being brought up, the Speaker proceeded to read it to the House as follows:
GEORGE P. R."The Prince Regent, acting in the name and on the behalf of his Majesty, thinks it right to inform the House of Commons, that, in consequence of the events which have occurred in France, in direct contravention of the Treaties concluded at Paris in the course of last year, his Royal Highness has judged it necessary to enter into engagements with his Majesty's Allies for the purpose of forming such a concert as present circumstances indispensably require, and as may prevent the revival of a system which experience has proved to be incompatible with the peace and independence of the nations of Europe."The Prince Regent has directed copies of the Treaties which have been concluded to be laid before the House of Commons, and he confidently relies on the support of this House in all measures which, it may be necessary for him to 296 adopt, in conjunction with his Majesty's Allies, against the common enemy at this important crisis."
Mr. Ponsonbyobjected to the day on which it was proposed to consider the Message brought down by the noble lord. He observed, that no instance had ever come to his knowledge, in which Parliament was called on to express its opinion, with respect to Treaties concluded with foreign Powers, at so short a notice. It was most unusual, except in cases of an unimportant nature, to ask of the House to express an opinion on a message from the throne, the very day after it had been brought down. It certainly was the custom and usage of Parliament to take messages into their consideration the day after they were delivered, when they related to ordinary occurrences, on which, from time to time, the Crown was pleased to communicate information to the House; but he believed that no instance could be adduced, in which treaties were laid before the House, by the command of the Crown—in consequence of which treaties they would probably be called on to vote large sums of money—where Parliament was required, on the succeeding day, to express a decided opinion. In a case of such extreme importance, more than twenty-four hours should be given for consideration. He could see no reason for this extraordinary precipation, but probably the noble lord could explain it. He had investigated the proceedings formerly adopted in similar cases, but he could find no instance in which Parliament was required, at so short a notice, to express its opinion. Impressed with these sentiments, he hoped the noble lord would allow further time for the consideration of the documents to which the Message referred.
Lord Castlereaghcontended, that it was entirely consonant to the practice of Parliament even on the most grave and important questions to vote an Address to a Message from the Crown the day subsequent to that Message being sent down. With respect to the subsidiary provision which the House would be called upon to make in consequence of the Treaties laid before it, that certainly would not come within the purview of the vote which it would be his duty to propose tomorrow. He should reserve that branch of the 297 argument for a subsequent day. As to the general scope of the vote which he meant to propose, he trusted he should be able to satisfy the House, that he did not ask them for any opinion which they were not fully competent to give from the information before them; and he hoped, therefore, they would not think it necessary in this instance to depart from what had been the usual arragement, or hesitate to afford that cordial support to the Crown which the present momentous crisis demanded.
Mr. Ponsonbyreplied, that the House was distinctly to be called upon for an opinion with respect to certain Treaties which were to be laid before them only twenty-four hours previous to such a vote, and he certainly considered that interval too brief. In the case of the Crown declaring war, for example, and concluding treaties with other Powers in concurrence with whom the war was to be carried on, a communication would be made to that House, and all that the House would be called upon to do, would be barely to thank the Crown for the communication, but not, he apprehended, to come to any opinion immediately upon the nature of the Treaties, or the policy or justice of the war. He could mention one very strong instance in point. At the time when an application was made to the House for money to assist Holland, six or seven days passed before the House returned any answer to that application. In fact, he did not believe that the noble lord could produce a single instance where the opinion of Parliament was given so hastily as on the succeeding day, upon communications of the kind now under consideration. The noble lord said, the House were substantially in possession of all the information contained in the papers which were ordered to be communicated; but that was not the case. Our Government had annexed a Declaration to the Treaty of the 25th of March, which was sent to Vienna for the approbation of the Sovereigns there, and he was ignorant, for one, how that Declaration was received. There was another point which he wished to mention. He had observed from what passed in another place, that the papers relative to the overture made by France to this country were to be laid before the House that day. Those papers had been sent by the noble lord to Vienna, for the purpose of receiving the sentiments of the Allies upon them; and what their 298 sentiments were he certainly did not know. It appeared to him, therefore, that there were solid and serious objections against bringing the House to an opinion so early as the ensuing day.
Lord Castlereaghsaid, that the vote which he intended to propose might be one of simple thanks for the Message from the Crown, or it might be one of a different description; but he was decidedly of opinion, that it would be more convenient to argue it tomorrow, than to go into it by anticipation, by discussing a question which was not now before them. With respect to the information which the right hon. gentleman seemed to think necessary before the House could exercise a sound judgment upon the subject, he had received the commands of the Prince Regent to lay before the House all the papers that could be necessary. Among those papers would be found a dispatch, from lord, Clancarty, communicating the manner in which the overture from Buonarparté to this country was received at Vienna, also the overture itself, and the judgment pronounced, upon it by the Allied Sovereigns. He trusted, therefore, that the right hon. gentleman and the House, when they had examined those papers, would be satisfied that every means had been afforded for enabling them to form a correct and decisive opinion.
§ Mr. Whitbreadsaid, that as an act of courtesy it might have been expected from the noble lord, that he would have given some hint as to the nature of the vote he meant to propose to the House tomorrow; but the whole strain of the noble lord's observations were, as usual, ambiguous; nor could he infer from the Message, which was equally ambiguous, whether the country, at this moment, was to be considered as in a state of war, or in that condition of armed peace in which it had been for some time past. Now, with regard to the papers in the hands of the noble lord, which he represented as containing the fullest information that could be required upon all the points connected with this important question, he had been informed, only a few hours since, that the noble lord was not in possession of the ratification of the Treaty by all the Allied Powers. Probably in the interval between his receiving that information, and the moment at which he was speaking, it might have arrived. He alluded to the ratification by Austria. If it 299 had arrived, it was of course included among the papers ordered to be presented; but if it was not among them, it was surely an important omission. It might have been expected, also, in the fulness of that information which the noble lord had announced, to have found among those papers, a treaty or agreement, concluded at Vienna between the Allied Powers, and referred to in the very first article of the Treaty signed on the 25th of March, without which Treaty it would be impossible for the House to come to a thorough examination of the whole subject. He hoped the noble lord would inform the House whether that Treaty was among the papers, or whether it was one which could be communicated to Parliament.
Lord Castlereaghsaid, that he was disposed to give every information as to the course he intended to pursue, on the following day, which could be imparted, without drawing on, inconveniently and by anticipation, a discussion of the general question. He had no objection, therefore, to state, that the Address which he should propose would simply echo the sentiments of the Message, and give an assurance to his Royal Highness of the support of Parliament, in the measures which he might think it necessary to pursue, in concert with his Allies, and in virtue of the treaties concluded with them. But, in taking the sense of the House upon that Address, he did not mean to obtain from it any vote, pledging it to an approbation of the susidiary arrangements. The vote of tomorrow would be taken upon the broad principle embraced in the Message, that of opposing the pretensions of the common enemy, as hostile to the repose and security of Europe, without entering into any of the details comprehended in the subsidiary engagements, [The noble lord here sat down, when Mr. Whitbread reminded him that he had not replied to the other questions which he asked. Lord Castlereagh then continued.]—With respect to the Austrian ratification, it certainly had not been received, and of course was not yet exchanged; but the hon. member would see from the correspondence now laid upon the table, that the complete and unqualified assent of Austria had been given to all the stipulations of the Treaty, and the cause of its delay was merely ministerial, from certain formalities and ceremonies which were necessary before it could be expedited to 300 this country. He considered it, however, in every respect to be as formal and authentic an instrument, as if the ratification had been regularly exchanged.
§ Mr. Whitbreadsaid, he supposed he might take it for granted that not the smallest doubt existed in the noble lord's mind as to the fact of the formal ratification of the Treaty by Austria, though it had not yet arrived—[Hear, hear! from lord Castlereagh]. He could not help remarking, however, how easily any little informalities were got over by the noble lord, when he was willing to communicate a document, and how insuperable they were if an informal instrument happened to be moved for by the opposite side of the House—[Hear, hear!]. He supposed there was as little doubt in the mind of the noble lord with respect to the other. Treaty concluded by the Allies, and which, as he before observed, was referred to in the first article of that of the 25th of March, though perhaps it had not yet been ratified. If, however, the noble lord, in the same spirit of conciliation, would consent to lay that unratified Treaty also before the House, or the substance of it at least, they would then be in possession of all the information which was necessary, as far as he was aware, to form a correct judgment; but if not, there would be this remarkable singularity in their proceedings; they would be called upon to approve a ratified Treaty, which commenced with giving its sanction to an unratified Treaty, and which unratified Treaty could not be exhibited either in toto or in substance to the House. Surely the noble lord might get over the difficulty in the one case as easily as he had in the other, and at least lay the substance of that Treaty upon the table. The noble lord had not satisfied him either as to the nature of the Address he meant to propose, or the vote he intended to move for. It was a very simple answer which he wished to obtain. He wished to know whether the Address would be considered as declaratory of the commencement of offensive war against France, or only as a preliminary proceeding authorizing offensive war whenever the Allied Powers should see fit to begin it?
Lord Castlereaghsaid, the hon. member was under a complete misconception as to the transactions at Vienna. If any treaty had been signed by the plenipotentiaries there, previously to the Treaty of 301 the 25th of March, it might undoubtedly be in a condition fit to lay before Parliament, either in substance or formally; but, in point of fact, no such treaty had ever been signed there. The deliberations at Congress had cetainly proceeded, and the plenipotentiaries had signed a protocol of those proceedings, which was the only instrument referred to by the first article of the Treaty of the 25th of March. The engagements contracted by that instrument, were engagements of honour and good faith, and so far certainly they were binding upon the parties: but they were capable of revision if circumstances should require it, and were not considered as having that solemn character which belonged to a treaty formally signed, ratified, and exchanged. He could assure the hon. gentleman there was no treaty in existence signed at Vienna previously to the 25th of March, that could be submitted to Parliament. With respect to the explanation which he had given of the course be meant to pursue tomorrow, he stated that it was his intention to call upon the House to vote an Address supporting the Crown in those engagements it had contracted with its Allies, for the purpose of maintaining the cause of Europe in concert with them, against the efforts of the common enemy. That Address, therefore, might be considered as conducting to a state of hostilities against Buonaparté and those who adhered to him; but with regard to any particular instructions which might have been issued to our naval and military commanders, he trusted the hon. gentleman would feel that it was not now a proper time for offering any explanation upon that subject.
§ Mr. Whitbreadsaid, his question did not point to any such information. With respect to formalities, in reference to the Treaty, or arrangement, or whatever it might be called, entered into by the plenipotentiaries at Vienna, he would just read the first article of the Treaty signed on the 25th of March:—"The high contracting parties solemnly engage to unite the resources of their respective states, for the purpose of maintaining entire the conditions of the Treaty of peace, concluded at Paris on the 30th of May, 1814, as also the stipulations determined upon and signed at the Congress of Vienna, with a view to complete the dispositions of that Treaty," &c. Would not any common person reading those words, think that they referred to some stipulations 302 which were binding and conclusive, and not to such as were still subject to revision and alteration? But the noble lord had now told the House, that the Allied Powers, in the exercise of those attributes which belonged to sovereigns, were still at liberty to change and modify those stipulations.
§ Mr. Tierneyobserved, that he understood the noble lord as intending to call upon the House to vote their approbation of the Treaties laid before them. If so, he must remark, that in the Treaty of the 25th of March there was a direct recognition of certain stipulations entered into and signed by the plenipotentiaries at Vienna. Now, how was it possible for the House to approve of a Treaty containing such a clause, without knowing to what it referred? If the noble lord would explain that circumstance in any way that should appear satisfactory to the House, he would be contented. There was another point also, upon which, perhaps, the noble lord would be candid enough to give some information; he meant, as to the amount of subsidy which it was intended to propose.
Lord Castlereaghreplied, that with respect to the latter question of the right hon. gentleman, he would find an answer to it in the Papers about to be laid upon the table; and as to the others, he apprehended he had already given a more precise notice of his motion than was customary. Any further explanation of it would be, he conceived, not only unusual, but derogatory to the character and practice of Parliament. It could only tend to force on the question prematurely.
§ Mr. Tierneysaid, he was not endeavouring to force on a, discussion. He only wished to know upon what grounds the proceedings of tomorrow were to stand?
Lord Castlereaghreplied, that he had most distinctly stated, that it was not his intention to call upon the House for any, opinion on the Treaties submitted to it, but merely to a general assurance of their support in the war which was likely to ensue.
§ Mr. Tierneysaid, that now they were told they were only to return an answer to the Message, setting aside both the subsidiary Treaties and the Treaty of the 25th of March. Would the noble lord be pleased to explain himself in one word—without any parenthesis? [A laugh!]
Lord Castlereaghreturned no answer; and the question was accordingly put, and carried in the affirmative.