MOTION RESPECTING THE MILAN COMMISSION.

HC Deb 06 July 1820 vol 2 cc259-72

Sir Ronald Fergusson

rose to bring forward his motion respecting the Milan Commission. It was with unfeigned regret that he felt himself bound in public duty, conscious as he was of his own inadequacy for the task, to bring this question under consideration. Undoubtedly, the subject was of a most delicate and painful nature, and, in its result, of the utmost importance to the peace and safety of the country. If his majesty's ministers had pursued a proper course either by not erasing her majesty's name from the Liturgy, or by retracing their steps when they saw the mischievous consequences of their conduct, the ferment which now agitated the public mind would have been avoided. The noble lord had on a former occasion observed, that if her majesty had not come to this country, no proceeding would have been instituted against her; and indeed it appeared that her crime was nothing more than daring to set her foot on English ground. The consequence of that act was, that two green bags were laid on their table, of the contents of which, however, he thanked God that House was totally ignorant. Gentlemen turned their backs on those bags, and, a few evenings afterwards, to use the phrase of the noble lord, he "he turned his back on himself," and abandoned the proceeding which he had instituted, by voting that the measure would lead to discussions "derogatory from the dignity of the Crown, and injurious to the best interests of the empire." The public and that House had a right to know (for though they had not opened this green bag. they had learned that a report had been elsewhere founded on its contents) where the facts contained in it had been collected. He would therefore state what, perhaps, would be denominated rumours, in explanation of this question. If he were wrong, the noble lord would contradict him, and he should feel obliged to him for that contradiction, because persons were said to be connected with this transaction who had heretofore held some rank and character in this country; therefore he should be rejoiced at their exculpation. It was generally understood, that the contents of the green bag were obtained through the means of certain persons, whether sent out in a public or a private capacity he cared not. They were, it seemed, commissioned to go to Milan, and to obtain all the information they could on the subject of the queen's conduct. Common rumour did not point at ministers as the inventors of this plan; that honour was given to another person—to one who held a high judicial situation in this country—he meant the vice-chancellor of England. If wrong he should be happy to hear his statements contradicted; but it was certainly understood that this gentleman took great pains in the proceeding. He indeed was supposed to be the head or inventor of this milan commission. In order to get at the facts, he recommended to notice a person who had practised in the same court with him long and successfully. One of his qualifications for the situation was rather extraordinary, for it appeared that he understood no language beyond his native tongue. A second, and, he believed, a third individual, were added to the commission. He did not himself know any of the parties employed on this occasion, and God forbid he ever should. To prove that the vice-chancellor was at the head of this army of espionnage, it was only necessary to observe, that he himself went to Milan in 1818, and remained there till September 19th in that year. The expense attending this commission (he cared not by what name it was called—whether a secret court of judicature, or a combination of spies) had been very great indeed. It must have been well known to ministers, that those persons had been employed, because he knew that no commission would be suffered to remain in Milan without a regular correspondence having taken place with the Austrian court. From the date he had mentioned, the statements contained in the green bag must have been received by his majesty's ministers a year ago; and yet not one step had been taken on the subject until the queen landed, and set her calumniators at defiance. Let not ministers think, that the dissatisfaction out of doors on this subject was a mere idle clamour. It was, on the contrary, deep-rooted; and, from the Land's-end to the Orkneys, pervaded persons of every station and description. The question was not whether her majesty was guilty of the high crimes alleged against her, but whether she, the queen of these realms, and the first subject of England, should not experience that justice which ought not to be refused to the lowest. In the first place, gross injustice had been done to her by introducing this green bag; and in the second place, they had acted still more unjustly by her when they brought in a bill, the most palpably disgraceful that was ever known in England. He should be glad if the noble lord would set him right as to the expense of this commission, but he understood it had cost the country 33,000l. In the first five months of its existence no less than 11,000l. was drawn by these commissioners. Now he would engage for half that money to procure such witnesses in Italy as would blast the character of every man and every woman there, however respectable. Let the House consider the creatures by whom the affidavits were sworn; they were procured from the meanest, the most rascally of mankind. And, was the queen of England, on such evidence as this, to be degraded at once and without trial? He said she was de graded, because ministers had brought in a bill which now hung over her majesty's head, accusing her with such gross crimes as could not be separated from the idea of degradation. They talked of granting her justice—of giving her the best means of defending herself; but how was such an intention proved? He was sorry, even thus shortly, to have occupied the attention of the House, but a sense of what was due to public justice and to the character of the country induced him to come forward. The gallant general concluded by moving—"That an humble Address be presented to his majesty, that he will be graciously pleased to give directions, that there be laid before this House, a copy of any commission or commissions, instruction or instructions, issued by his majesty's commands, since the departure of her majesty the queen from this country in 1814, for taking depositions, or making other inquiries, relating to her majesty, during her residence abroad; together with an account of all sums of money expended in the execution of such commissions or instructions, and by whom such sums were respectively issued."

Lord Castlereagh

felt it to be his duty, under the circumstances in which the House was at present placed, to oppose the motion. It would, he conceived, be a waste of their time, if he were led, in consequence of what had fallen from the gallant general, to enter into an explanation of the course of conduct that his majesty's ministers had been induced to take in consequence of the important subject which had recently occupied their consideration. Had the gallant general, he would ask, seen any thing in the general conduct of ministers that rendered it necessary to bring this question under discussion? Or had he perceived any part of their proceedings that appeared to justify the casting the least imputation on them, as the authors of this painful investigation? He conceived that the gallant general had not; and therefore he would simply apply himself to the motion now before the House. The objection he took to it did not arise from any indisposition on the part of ministers to give the fullest information on the subject when the proper time arrived; for, whatever might be the gallant general's opinion of ministers— whatever cause might have induced him to imagine that they threw an improper shade of mystery over this transaction, with respect to the mode in which it was conducted, or the manner in which the charges were to be provided for—he could assure the gallant general, that there was no portion of the painful investigation with which it was connected that he would more readily, if the occasion suited, place him and the House in possession of. He believed, most sincerely, that the whole transaction, from the first to the last, would bear the light, at least as far as he had any knowledge of it. But he might be allowed to say, that the present was a very curious mode of proceeding, if it were introduced with a view to assist or elucidate the inquiry now pending before parliament. It was most extraordinary, in the very outset, before the House had adopted any measure of inquiry of their own, and without waiting for that which it was quite clear they would arrive at by another process—while they were ignorant of the whole course of evidence—that the gallant general should call on one of the parties to put the House in possession of all the means that had been adopted to gain information, and to state facts which would not in any degree render other parts of the case intelligible. It certainly was not very common in judicial proceedings to give up the means by which information had been procured. Indeed, nothing could be more subversive of the course of justice, nor was any thing ever known more contrary to the order of proceeding within the walls of parliament. It was such a line of conduct as he thought the gallant general would not, on reflection, persevere in. Feeling thus, it was not his intention to negative the motion, but to meet it with the previous question. As he had formerly stated, with respect to the conduct of foreign ministers abroad, he did not wish to wrap up the government in mystery. When the proper time came, ministers were ready to give every information, but they would be guilty of a dereliction of duty if they did so prematurely. The House could not decide whether they acted with a view to the ends of justice, or for the purpose of oppression, until all the facts were before them; then only could they judge correctly of their conduct, or of the conduct of their agents. Those facts were not before them, and therefore he contended that the motion of the gallant general was wholly premature. In this stage of the proceeding he must intreat the House to enter fully into the reasons why, in his opinion, information on this part of the subject should not be laid before them. He had no hesitation in stating, broadly and distinctly, what was the fact. The outline of the case, unconnected with the bill before the other House, was simply this:—The statements concerning the conduct of her majesty reached ministers from so many quarters, and had become so notorious (statements, let it be observed, that were not procured by any system of fishing, but which came voluntarily from various quarters, many of them of the most grave and official character), that it was deemed necessary to inquire into their truth; and, unless the gallant general laid it down as a maxim, that the servants of the Crown were obliged to shut their eyes and ears against every offence that threatened the welfare of the state—unless he conceived, because they must experience the most painful feelings, when charges were made against a person of such illustrious rank, that, therefore, they ought not to take the plain course of justice on such occasions, and ought not to institute any inquiry into reports of this nature;—unless the gallant general reasoned thus, there was nothing in the conduct of ministers that deserved censure. He would hereafter argue with the gallant general why the course of inquiry to which he objected was, at the time, the most proper. He admitted that that course of inquiry was not strictly official—it was not sanctioned by any proceeding that could give it the name of a commission—it was not distinguished by any of those formal instruments which were usually known to the constitution. He would state, in due time, why he considered this demi-official proceeding—a proceeding not strictly according to the forms of the constitution—was, under the view then taken, the fit and proper one to be adopted; and he would also consider the question, whether the commission had acted with severity or injustice; or had hunted for that sort of information, which, according to the gallant general, Italy was famous for—which a sum of money could buy, and by means of which the fairest character might be blackened. If the gallant general had waited for the facts of the case, instead of applying his reasoning to certain rumours, he, perhaps, would not have made his motion. The information alluded to was not drawn from Italy alone; and although he called the persons who were sent out "the Milan commission," their inquiries were not restricted to conduct pursued in that place. Their orders were to look to every thing that could be devised, in reason, to detect and separate falsehood from truth. That was the system adopted in this case; but certainly the inquiries of the commissioners were applied to a much more extensive portion of Europe than the gallant general seemed to suppose. With respect to the characters of the persons employed, he was sure the gallant general could not mean to insinuate any thing against them. There was nothing in the character of those individuals that could lead the House to suppose that they would take any step inconsistent with British justice. At a proper moment he should be prepared to defend all their proceedings. When the facts alleged against her majesty flowed in on government with so strong a tide, when the number of charges hourly increased, and when they assumed a most grave and serious aspect, ministers felt that they had no right, intrusted as they were with a responsible authority, to let those accusations rest on the ground of rumour. They thought it was their duty, even with reference to the character and dignity of the queen herself, to take the best means to discover what degree of weight they deserved. Under the circumstances, they did not deem it a case, in the examination of which it would be wise or prudent to employ that formal commission which would place on record the statements that were to be inquired into, even though they turned out to be unfounded. They conceived it would answer the ends of justice if they were inquired into by persons of such character in their profession as would enable ministers to place confidence in their proceedings, and to give credit to their report. Certainly, it did not fall within the province of the vice-chancellor to lend himself voluntarily to such a proceeding; but he must at the same time observe, that there was nothing in the conduct of the vice-chancellor on that occasion that could in any way reflect discredit on his character. He held a high judicial situation; but, when he was called on to inquire into the matter at issue, he (lord C.) knew of no just ground which could be alleged to prevent him from informing himself of the truth or falsehood of the reports that had been circulated against the character of the illustrious individual who was then residing abroad, and afterwards stating the conviction of his mind. He was yet to learn that there was any thing in the vice-chancellor's situation that ought to preclude him from entering on an inquiry of this nature—always provided that it was pursued with truth and honour. The character of the vice-chancellor, so far from militating against the impartiality of the inquiry, afforded an additional pledge that it was a just one. He would now briefly notice the course that was taken. In the first instance, application was made to a gentleman at the bar of the chancery-court, a Mr. Cooke, for his assistance. There was no man in the country, he believed, who had the honour of his acquaintance, that did not respect him. He had seen him only once; but, if a person might judge from the propriety of his appearance, and the gravity of his manner. For his own part, he thought it would have been wrong to send a young gentleman on such a mission; although the gallant general might suppose that he would get much sooner into all the secrets of the matter than a person of more mature age. When the business was of so delicate a nature, it was, in his opinion, most proper to employ an individual of grave and thinking habits. The gallant general said, an individual was selected who knew nothing of foreign languages. This, he conceived, was a pledge that nothing more was intended, but that the individual should go to the appointed place, merely to hear the evidence as a professional man. It showed that he was not sent out to insinuate himself as a spy into those transactions, but that he was specifically sent out as a person who, when the witnesses that were to substantiate the facts came before him, was ready to take their depositions, and to take them in that form which was suitable to the practice of our jurisprudence, and surrounded with all those safeguards by which our law was characterised. It was necessary, therefore, to delay any motion of the nature of that now before the House, because, to understand the question well, the gallant general ought to see the depositions, examine their forms, and observe the safeguards by which they were surrounded. If he had seen them, he would probably feel that no censure attached to those who superintended them. Every thing was done to guard those who were examined from stating any matter on hearsay—every thing was done to guard them against speaking unadvisedly—every thing was done that could make them dismiss from their minds the hope of receiving any emolument in consequence of their testimony; and they were informed that their characters would be examined in some competent court of law. He was convinced that no individual could be selected better adapted to fulfil the duties that were intrusted to him than this gentleman; and he was quite sure, that with respect to the necessary safeguards, no depositions had ever been more strictly drawn up. He believed that those who had seen the proceedings in this case, had viewed them with no other feeling but that of the greatest respect for those who conducted them. He hoped he had repelled the idea that any servant of his majesty had been disgraced in the discharge of his duty, because he had looked into facts which materially affected the honour and dignity of the Crown; and he had also, he trusted, repelled any insinuation that had been thrown out against Mr. Cooke, or against the eminent solicitor who accompanied him, and who had assisted in taking those depositions. As to the expenses of the commission, no disposition existed to withhold from the House all the information that was necessary, when the proper moment arrived. There would be a want of delicacy in obtruding it on the House at present; but when the proper time arrived it would not be concealed. The expenses incidental to the parties who were sent abroad must be brought before the House on the same ground that the House would be called on to defray the sum necessary for her majesty in entering on her defence. The expense attending the allegations on the one side, and the preparations for meeting them on the other, would be laid before parliament in due time. As he had before said, ministers wished for no mystery with respect to any part of this transaction. But he did protest solemnly against this mode of introducing partial motions, for it exhibited the air of a mere party proceeding much more than it did that of a real desire to forward the ends of justice. Individuals would not wait for the proper moment to argue those questions; they ran unprepared into the midst of a most important subject, and dragged it into view, not at once, but piecemeal. They did not take a plain and intelligible course, but came forward in a way the most in- vidious, both with respect to the proceeding itself, and with reference to private character. Would it not be better for gentlemen to restrain their feelings until they saw the whole proceeding? If, when that was done, ministers could not explain themselves to the satisfaction of the House, then would come the time for them to encounter the animadversions of gentlemen. But, at that moment, he protested against investigating a transaction of this nature. He would not consent, when a charge was brought against the queen, that it should be set aside, and that ministers should be placed on their trial, with reference to some collateral circumstances. He would not wrap himself up in mystery as to this transaction; but, at the fair and proper moment, he would give all the information in his power. In the mean time, he thought he aid not ask too much of the House, when they had suspended their opinion with respect to the proceeding itself, also to suspend their opinion with respect to the conduct of ministers. He felt it necessary to make this appeal, because he was dragged into partial explanations on this subject, in consequence of the course adopted, which, he must say, was rather dictated by political feeling than by a strong regard for the principles of justice. Owing to this system, he was compelled to give garbled and broken explanation to the House, and to defend the character of individuals less fully and less forcibly than he would be enabled to do if he had an opportunity of discussing the whole question. He would not negative this motion, but he would meet it with the previous question, to show that the information should not have been called for; and he hoped it would be a warning to gentlemen on the other side, not to let their zeal get the better of their understanding, in submitting motions to the House under circumstances like the present. Let the subject rest until the whole case was brought forward; and let not the House and the country be lowered in the eyes of Europe, which they would be, if it were seen that, when a great question, important to the Crown and the empire, was agitated, they could not deal with it fairly, but must meet it by little motions of this kind, in order to get some unfair advantage over ministers, as if they were on their trial. He asked for no favour—he shrank from no responsibility. All he claimed was, that the conduct of ministers should be fairly and strictly ex- amined, when the circumstances were before the House, when they would have an opportunity to explain themselves fully; he only protested against these repeated anticipations of explanation.

Mr. Creevey

, not withstanding he might incur the displeasure of the noble lord, and notwithstanding the protest and the warning the noble lord had given to the House, would maintain that the proposition of his gallant friend was a perfectly just one, and the time precisely that in which the motion ought to have been made. His gallant friend had not precipitated his motion; he had delayed it till a certain proceeding had taken place in the other House of Parliament. So anomalous a course was, perhaps, never pursued upon any former occasion. The queen of this country was criminally proceeded against; and how? By the introduction of a bill in which she was called by the most infamous and scandalous names. Neither her majesty nor that House had any information on the subject; and, under these circumstances, his gallant friend said, what he conceived to be most proper. "Let me see the foundation of this measure; if you make a charge of this nature, let me see your infernal Milan commission, or whatever commission it may be, on whose statement it is founded." It was quite a novelty, a thing hitherto unknown to the constitution of this country, for the king to authorize a commission to hunt a subject with lawyers, attornies, and spies, assisted by the emperor of Austria, through every part of Europe. This indeed was quite a novel system. It was dangerous when any responsible servant of the Crown was placed at the head of such a proceeding; it was much more dangerous when a person like Mr. Leach—he begged his pardon, he should have said sir John Leach—who was not a responsible servant of the Crown, organized a system of es-pionnage against any individual of this country; but it was still worse when a person, placed in the situation of that gentleman, inflamed the feelings of particular persons by stating to them things of a doubtful nature, but which were calculated strongly to excite their passions. They had a right, he contended, to have this vice-chancellor before them. He would maintain that he was a disturber of the public peace of this country. [Hear, hear! and order.] He would show how he was a disturber of the public peace. In 1814, all the unhappy differences between his majesty and the queen were supposed to be settled: an arrangement with respect to money matters took place; and one of his majesty's ministers negotiated with her for leaving the country. It was quite impossible that the noble lord opposite, or the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Canning), considering the feelings he had expressed towards the queen, could have again awakened those differences which were thought to have expired. Who then had done it? It was the vice-chancellor who had kept alive the vindictive feelings of his majesty towards the queen [Order, order.] He was not out of order: he would contend that it was the vice-chancellor who had kept alive the vindictive passions of the king against the queen. If the feeling were not vindictive, he did not know what the word "vindictive" meant. Several years ago the queen was prosecuted; she left the country: after a long, absence she came back, and now she was prosecuted again. If this was not vindictive, he did not know what was. But now for the result of this commission. By the aid of his confederates—the emperor of Austria, Italian spies, English lawyers, and English money—he contrived to have this bag filled and brought over. It was clear, however, that it was not wanted: it had been in the possession of ministers of the Crown for these twelve months, and they had never made any use of it. This showed that they considered its contents as of a private nature, and not as state evidence against the queen. If they thought otherwise, why did they not prosecute her at once? Instead of doing that they negotiated with her at St. Omer's, and in this country; and it appeared on the Journals of the House, that the business was in fact a family difference. But the queen, it appeared, would not consent to the propositions made to her. That was her crime at present. Her first crime was having placed her foot on the English shore, and her next, a determination not to leave it. This vice-chancellor was again answerable to the House for his conduct on this point, because they were called on to assist in the utter subversion of the law of this country, and to adopt a completely anomalous proceeding in consequence of his conduct. Secret evidence had been taken by a secret commission; and, after a period of twelve months had elapsed, it was laid before the Lords, who, without any examination of witnesses, had finally adopted certain charges against the queen. A bill was then brought in for the purpose of degrading her. If this were allowed, if a bill of this nature were suffered to pass into a law, he contended that the laws of this country would be totally subverted, and no man in the kingdom would be safe. They had a right to know who the author of this measure was. That individual was answerable to the House in another point of view, perhaps as important as those he had mentioned;—he was answerable as the enemy of the sovereign; for no man could tell what situation the king might be placed in before that bill passed. Whatever ministers might state, this was a mere private charge: it was the king wanting to get rid of the queen. Ministers knew there was no crime cognizable by law, and therefore they sought to relieve him by bill. He must then appear as a private individual when he came to parliament for relief; and when he came before that House to be released from his wife, he must come, like all persons applying for relief to a court of equity, with clean hands. He owed all this to sir John Leach. When a case of that nature came before them, they ought to use the words of Jesus Christ when the woman was taken in adultery—"Let him that is without sin cast the first stone." They were told that there must be no recrimination in this case. He knew that no such word was allowed in a court of justice; but, as he had before stated, when his majesty applied to that House, he must come with clean hands. The bill declared her majesty to be guilty of adultery; and when that measure came before the House, it would be their duty to inquire whether, when the princess of Brunswick, the cousin of his majesty, came to this country to espouse him, he was not himself then living in adultery [Order, order.] Of this he was sure, that the king had been placed in his present situation by the officious adviser to whom he had alluded. He saw the proceeding with pain and regret from the beginning; and when the message came down he warned the House of the situation in which it would place the country, because he was certain that the course adopted on this occasion, that of proceeding by bill, would not only overturn the laws of the land, but would shake the steady, sober, moral habits of the people. Looking to the case in every point of view, there was, in his opinion, an absolute necessity for the production of this Milan commission, in order that they might properly know the author of these unfortunate circumstances.

The previous question was carried without a division.