Commons Sitting of 16 May 1822

ABSENTEES.
Sir T. Lethbridgesaid, he had a petition to present signed by 600 respectable inhabitants of the county of Somerset. He hoped the chancellor of the exchequer would not be displeased with him for presenting the petition, as the prayer of it was rather unusual—it prayed the House to lay on additional taxes. From the tax which the petitioners proposed, which was in itself politic and beneficial, an ample fund might be supplied to make up for other taxes which might be repealed for the relief of the country. The petitioners felt for the distress of the country, and they called the attention of the House to a circumstance collateral to that distress, the number of Absentees who were gone to take up their residence in foreign parts. The greater part of these were persons of quality and fortune, not only from England but from the whole empire. The petitioners calculated that in the city of Paris alone, there resided 10,000 families of English, Irish, and Scots; that these families consisted on an average of five individuals each; and the petitioners went the length of saying, that these persons do not spend less than a guinea a day each, or 50,000 l. per diem, 350,000 l. a week, and 18 millions a year [laugh]. This calculation, which certainly seemed at first sight enormous, was for Paris alone; while Boulogne, Calais, Tours, Bruges, Brussels, and almost all other cities of the continent were filled with English, who were in the habit of spending large sums. In these statements the petitioners were in part borne out by the noble marquis, who, in the course of his enlightened speech
654
of last night, had said that no one could walk in any of the large towns of the continent without imagining that the British formed a large portion of the inhabitants. The petitioners also stated, that they viewed with alarm, the practice of sending abroad youth for education, a practice prejudicial to morals, and tending to sap our holy faith. The petitioners spoke of the injury to the revenue from the absence of so many persons of fortune, and further prayed the House to impose a tax on the property or income of placemen. They hoped also that the House would prevent money being paid to pensioners, sinecurists, placemen, or public annuitants abroad, except on actual service. He thought the feeling which actuated the persons who resided abroad an extraordinary one; for though the bonus was large, he would rather live in England, on 50 l. a year, subject to all the privations of such an income, than leave the country in an hour of difficulty. The bonus might be pleaded in excuse of the absentees; but it also might be pleaded in justification of the House, if they imposed a tax equal to the share of burthens which the absentees thus contrived to escape There was another great temptation to reside abroad, from the advantage gained on transferring money to the continent, which on sending 100 l. to Paris, was about 25 or 26 pert cent [a laugh.] If the agricultural distress could be relieved, through the medium of a new tax of this sort, the suggestion of the petitioners might be beneficially adopted.
Mr. Ricardowished to set the hon. baronet right, as to the state of the exchange, which was now, he could assure him, very nearly at par; and it was impossible it could be far otherwise, because with a metallic circulation in this country and in France, the exchange could never vary more than from ½ to ¾ per cent. As to the petition, he should be sorry to see its prayer granted; because a tax on the property or income of absentees, would hold out a direct encouragement to them to take away their capital, as well as their persons. Now, we had at any rate their capital, which was useful, though not so useful as it they also stayed at home. What most surprised him was, that the hon. baronet should bring such a petition forward, at the very time that he was proposing in the agricultural committee a resolution which might make all the articles of life, and provisions in particular,

655
attainable at the dearest rate. The hon. baronet was for high duties; the imposition of which would be the readiest means of compelling people of small fortunes to quit the kingdom. Of all the evils complained of, he (Mr. R.) was still disposed to think the corn laws the worst. He conceived that were the corn laws once got rid of, and our general policy in these subjects thoroughly revised, this would be the cheapest country in the world; and that, instead of our complaining that capital was withdrawn from us, we should find that capital would come hither from all corners of the civilized world. Indeed, such a result must be certain, if we could once reduce the national debt—a reduction, which, although by many considered to be impracticable, he considered by no means to be so. That great debt might be reduced by a fair contribution of all sorts of property—he meant, that, by the united contribution of the mercantile, the landed, and he would add, the funded interest, the national debt might be certainly got rid of. If this were done, and if the government would pursue a right course of policy as to the corn laws, England would be the cheapest country in which a man could live; and it would rise to a state of prosperity, in regard to population and riches, of which, perhaps, the imaginations of hon. gentlemen could at present form no idea. [Hear, hear.]
Mr. Denis Brownedwelt on the evils suffered in Ireland from the absentee system. All taxes were on consumption; so that they all fell on the resident gentry, while the absentees entirely escaped. One half of the men of property of Ireland were calculated to be absentees. It was disgraceful that in a country of statesmen and philosophers, such an evil as this should exist, and that we should despair of a remedy. He was disposed to apply himself to this practical evil, and not to draw sun-beams out of cucumbers.
Mr. H. Gurneysaid, he conceived the chancellor of the exchequer would have no small difficulty in assessing the tax, proposed by the petitioners on the income of absentees; though he had always thought the abolition of the property tax, and the thus throwing the weight of the whole taxation on articles of domestic consumption, was the greatest financial error committed since the peace. He entirely distrusted the statement of the petitioners, as to the enormous sums they conceived to be spent by Englishmen
656
abroad; though they would naturally think that these millions, if spent, would be much more conveniently spent at Bath. In fact, the English abroad were, for the most part, either mere travellers, or persons living very economically; whilst, in the case of those who reduced large establishments in this country, and remained on the continent for any length of time, in most instances the chief part of their revenues went to pay off debts and incumbrances previously contracted, and took that direction at home, in which the money would be most usefully applied.—Mr. Gurney stated, that far from supporting the prayer of the petition, he was a friend to free ingress and egress to and from the kingdom [hear!]. There should, however, be no inequality in this respect. If the rich man might go abroad for convenience or amusement, surely the poor man should be allowed to go abroad for subsistence. [hear!]. He alluded to the laws against the emigration of artificers, which had recently been brought to his notice by a paragraph in a newspaper.—The hon. member read the following paragraph which appeared in the Morning Chronicle of Monday last:—"Saturday, Michael Donaghue, George Burgess, John Elliott, and Thomas Checkers, engineers, were brought, to Bow-street, charged with attempting to leave the kingdom, for the purpose of conveying a knowledge of their art to foreigners, against the statute. The prisoners, together with a man named Featherstone, were in the employment of Mr. Martineau, an engineer, in White-cross-street. Some weeks ago a man named Craven made his appearance among the workmen there, and by liberal offers seduced them from their master and engaged them to go to Paris, where he had established several manufactories. Mr. Martineau got information of it, and Featherstone was apprehended before he left London. The others were followed to Dover, and apprehended there by Bishop, one of the principal officers. Bishop had a warrant in his pocket against Craven, but he had embarked before the officer reached Dover. The prisoners were committed for want of bail."—He knew the law under which these men were proceeded against was an old one; but whatever justice there might be in proceeding against Craven, as the seducer of artificers to leave the country, it was an extraordinary hardship that the men themselves should be pun-

657
ished for attempting to take their industry to a place where they saw the best choice of gaining a livelihood. He thought it incumbent on him to bring this case before the House, as a conversation had formerly taken place on the subject, between the hon. member for Aberdeen and the president of the board of trade, which led him to hope that this oppressive law might be repealed, and the poor man and the rich placed, as in all common sense, and common fairness they ought to be, on a footing of equal freedom. [Hear! hear!]
Mr. Dickinsonthought that his right hon. friend (Mr. D. Brown) had put this question on its right footing: he had fixed the attention of the House to the main point of the petitioners—not to those who were travelling for their health, or to the youth of this country for instruction, for they too well knew the advantages of foreign travel—but to those who had fixed themselves habitually on the continent, and whose object was, to avoid the taxes, and expend their incomes in a foreign country, thereby stimulating the commerce and the agriculture of France with that capital which ought to stimulate the commerce and agriculture of England. What would happen when his hon. friend's (Mr. Ricardo's) project of paying off the national debt was accomplished, he could not pretend to say; but this he knew, that such a payment had been a vision that had inhabited the brain of many a speculative enthusiast, from the institution of that debt up to the present hour. He also knew, from experience and history, that emigrations were dangerous to the countries from which they sprung, and advantageous where they went: Holland, within the last two centuries, was a country almost wholly made by emigrations; and the revocation of the edict of Nantes had, according to historians, furnished 50,000 emigrants, who had increased the prosperity of England, of Belgium, and of Prussia, and inflicted a blow on France from which she had not yet recovered. He doubted the practicability of a tax on emigrants, but he would put it ad verecundiam to the emigrants themselves. He remembered to have read an anecdote of a Persian ambassador at Paris, who brought with him a sod of his native earth, and his first duty in a morning was to reverence it, in order that it might remind him that every act of that day should be something done for the benefit of Persia. If our sta-
658
tionary English emigrants had a sod, it would remind them, that every deed of theirs, while they were expending their incomes in France, would be something done to the detriment of England. In this absence of their patriotism, he would wish to press upon them one of the best maxims of antiquity: "Spartam nactuses: hanc exorna."
The Chancellor of the Exchequerthought the hon. member for Portarlington and other members had sufficiently pointed out the objections to the tax proposed, and the impossibility of carrying their wishes into effect. Of the many modes of taxing absentees, which had been suggested to him, none appeared to him practicable. Among the many absentees from Ireland, there were not a few who resided in England, and who, consequently, did not thereby evade their share of the taxes imposed generally upon the empire. He had taken considerable pains to ascertain the proportion of taxes which might have been borne by the absentees on the continent, had they remained in England, and he found that it did not exceed 5,000 l. a-year, out of a taxation of between six and seven millions. Many of these absentees had found themselves compelled to go abroad, for the sake, probably, of retrenchment, or with a view to the arrangement of their disordered affairs. With respect to those persons who went abroad for the purpose of laying down a system of economy, who were vegetating rather than living, in different parts of Europe, he believed the most effectual way to bring them home, and to keep them here, would be to make this country as comfortable as possible for them. This would be in some measure effected by the fall of prices, but there were circumstances which must always contribute to make this country a dearer place of residence, than most parts of the continent. However, in proportion as prices became more equalized with those of the continent, the temptation to reside abroad would cease. For he was persuaded that there was not an individual, who possessed the common feelings that belonged to an Englishman, who would not, if he could, prefer living in his own country to a residence on a foreign shore.
Sir I. Coffinsaid, that the British officers residing abroad were driven there, not by inclination, but by poverty.
Mr. W. Smithexpressed a wish, that the chancellor of the exchequer would bring

659
in a bill to remove the restrictions on the lower classes of mechanics, with respect to emigration. There was no law which prevented a man from carrying his capital to any country in Europe, and establishing a manufactory there; but, if one of his workmen attempted to follow him, he was liable to be sent to prison. Such a state of things had been most properly described as harsh and tyrannical. The right hon. gentleman had truly said, that the best way of inducing emigrants to return to this country would be, to make England a cheaper and more comfortable place of residence. This was not to be effected, however, by raising the price of corn, which was one of the objects of the bill now passing through the House. To suppose that the condition of the people could be materially improved by a reduction of the interest of the debt was one of the grossest delusions that had ever been practiced on the country. Reduction of taxation might afford some relief; and to that object ought the efforts of parliament to be mainly directed.
Ordered to lie on the table.

EMBASSY TO THE SWISS CANTONS.
Mr. Warrerose to bring forward the motion, of which he had given notice, relative to the embassy to the Swiss Cantons. He could assure the House, that in return for the favour of their attention, he would confine himself strictly to the subject of his motion, without going into the consideration of the general question, which was discussed last night. The object at which he aimed was a reduction of the expense of our embassies. By the return which had been laid on the table, it appeared, that from the year 1750 to 1783, four ministers had been sent to the Swiss Cantons at a salary of 1,572 l. From the year 1783 to 1792, an individual named Braun, who had been alluded to last night, discharged the functions of chargé d'affaires in the Swiss Cantons for a salary of only 250 l. Whether, in the reductions which were made in 1786, Mr. Pitt bore in mind what had taken place at Paris three years before, he could not pretend to say, but he could assure the noble marquis, that if he took the liberty of alluding to the salary of the American ambassador, it was neither with the design of subverting the monarchy, nor from any desire to wage war upon the constitution. If the general sort of charge which had been thrown out by the noble marquis
660
meant any thing, it would operate as a veto against ever naming the salaries of American ambassadors, lest the parallel should have the effect of overturning the existing institutions of Great Britain. He would venture, then, to suggest the possibility, that when Mr. Pitt reduced the salary of the minister to the Swiss Cantons, he recollected the fact of Dr. Franklin; who had been sent by the rising republic of America as ambassador to the court of Paris, and who in point of diplomatic skill completely over-matched our own ambassador, lord Stormont, at a salary of 1,000 l. a year, including the expenses of his secretary. The noble marquis had become so fastidious that he could not bear to hear any allusion made to the establishments on the other side of the Atlantic; but he (Mr. W.) could not see why it was not quite as justifiable to allude to the institutions of the modern republic of America, either for the purposes of illustration, or with a view of holding them up to the imitation of our own country, as it was to advert to the ancient republics of Greece or Rome.—He now came to the period at which the scale of expenditure, with regard to the Swiss missions, underwent a change, namely, from 1792 to 1798. It was true, that the scale adopted by Mr. Pitt was much higher in point of salary than that received by Mr. Braun; but he begged the House to consider what was the state of Europe at the period when Mr. Wickham began to negociate with the French republic in the year 1796. Buonaparte was at that time victorious in Italy, Belgium was conquered, and, in fact, Switzerland was the single isolated spot in Europe in which we were able to establish a mission. He begged leave to call the attention of the House to a document which proved the importance of this mission, arising out of the peculiar circumstances of Europe at that period.—[Here the hon. member read an extract from a letter addressed by our minister plenipotentiary to the Swiss cantons to the minister of the French republic, desiring to be made acquainted with the disposition of the French republic towards a negotiation for the general pacification of Europe.]—From the year 1799 to 1814, with the exception of a special mission for a short time after the peace of Amiens, the state of Europe rendered it impossible for this country to send any embassy to the Swiss cantons. At the peace of Amiens, lord Liverpool,

661
then lord Hawkesbury, did send a gentleman of the name of Moore on a sort of special mission, who remained out of the country a few months and then returned. The next period was that from 1814 to 1820, when Mr. Stratford Canning was sent as envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to the Swiss Cantons. The noble lord had stated last night, that the object of Mr. Canning's mission was the organization and restoration of the Swiss territory; and he had referred to the treaty on the table, of April 1815, from which it certainly appeared, that a considerable degree of diplomatic business had been transacted in Switzerland. The declaration of the allied powers, in regard to the Helvetic confederation, was made on the 20th March, 1815; on the 3rd of April in the same year, the diet of Zurich was attended by the different ministers of the allied powers, among whom Mr. Canning was present on the part of this country, and baron Krudener, as chargé d'affaires for the Russian government. The result of their deliberations was, the re-incorporation of the three cantons of Le Valais, Geneva, and Neufchatel. A protocol was also signed by the different ministers relative to certain cessions made by the king of Sardinia to the Swiss Cantons. The object of the allied powers was to restore Switzerland to its former state in point of territory, and to guarantee its neutrality; and he believed the territorial state of Switzerland was now just what it was in 1796. The argument of the noble marquis, therefore, for the necessity of a minister plenipotentiary to the courts of Wirtemburg and Bavaria, on the ground of the territory of those countries having increased, could not apply to Switzerland. The noble marquis had said, that the House was not to estimate the necessity of a mission to any country from the quantity of direct business which might be transacted there. He (Mr. W.) professed himself utterly at a loss to conjecture the nature of the diplomatic intercourse between this country and the Swiss Cantons. If dispatches were sent there with a view of being afterwards forwarded somewhere else, why, he should be glad to know, were they not sent directly to the ministers to whom they were addressed? The avowed object of the mission in 1815 was the maintenance of the neutrality of Switzerland. Now, how could neutrality be violated except by hostile aggression
662
from without? France was sufficiently disposed to violate that neutrality in 1798, and it was possible that she might be disposed to violate it now. But it was not the resident minister in the Swiss Cantons who could first discover such hostile dispositions and make the necessary communications to the secretary of state. It was the minister of the hostile government, who, if he had any eyes or cars, would first be able to observe the increase or military force, the disposition to infringe existing treaties, and other indications of a hostile character, which he would of course communicate to his government at home. There could be no necessity, therefore, for so expensive a mission as that of 1815, for the mere purpose of preserving the neutrality of Switzerland. Neither he nor his friends around him could be charged with inconsistency, on the ground of having formerly supported the establishment of 1815, for it would be recollected, that when the noble lord brought down an amended estimate for that establishment, the right hon. member for Knaresborough (Mr. Tierney), moved for a committee of inquiry, and, subsequently, on the motion for bringing up the report, the same right hon. member made another attempt, by proposing an amendment, to induce the House to pause before it sanctioned that establishment.—It was sometimes urged as an argument in support of diplomatic establishments, that it was necessary to keep them up on a scale of relative intercourse, and that if a foreign power sent an embassy to this country, it was necessary for us to return the compliment. Now, he intreated the House to mark how impossible it was to apply this argument in the case of Switzerland. Let the House mark the conduct of Switzerland with regard to her missions. Fixed missions she had none; whatever embassies she had sent to this country had been special. The last mission which Switzerland sent to this country, was in 1815; so that as soon as her neutrality had been guaranteed, and her thanks recorded in the face of Europe, she recalled this special mission. If he were asked, why he had not objected to the establishment of the Swiss mission in 1816 or 1817, he would answer by an observation which he had often made, and the truth of which he believed was undeniable; namely, that that House, notwithstanding all its collective wisdom and all its united talents, could never attend

663
to more than one thing at a time. As a proof of this, he begged to recall to their recollection the exclusive interest which the discussions relative to the late Queen had excited in that House. During the time that such questions were under discussion, he would ask if the present question would have obtained a hearing? He would bear in mind that during that time the question of parliamentary reform itself could not be brought forward, as there was not even a chance of getting the House to listen to it. Immediately previous to this they had the Manchester business. In 1815, the time when the civil list was discussed, they were engaged, not in settling whether a pacific ambassador should be sent to this or the other court, but whether that military monster which had taken hold of the continental nations, should also take hold of us—whether we should in the time of profound peace, keep up a standing army to the amount of 99,000 men? In 1817, there was the suspension of the Habeas Corpus, and the passing of the Indemnity bills; and, in 1818, there was the immediate prospect of a dissolution of parliament, and the members were more intent upon what was to go on out of doors, than what was going on within. It would be borne in mind, however, that for twenty months previous to the time at which the appointment was made, there had been no minister plenipotentiary sent out. That the present minister had been sent, some might be disposed to call a political arrangement, and others an accommodation granted to a party. He hoped, however, that he should be indulged in what he had to state. He had no objection whatever to the gentleman who held the mission, or to the mode in which he had been appointed. His sole objection was to the mission itself. The noble marquis had said, that the views of ministers had been misunderstood; but he would beg leave to refer the noble lord to what took place when the address of last June was voted. That address to the throne was for economy and retrenchment generally, and particularly for a revision of the civil list. Now, the House would never surely have alluded to that subject in an address to the sovereign, if they had considered all the details of the civil list as permanently settled four or five years ago. He would not have called the attention of the House to the question, unless it had been for the necessity of some alteration in our system of expendi-
664
ture. An alteration must take place: and if the House would go into no inquiry, and propose no measure to that effect, he knew not how they could appear before the tribunal of the country. If it had been found that during twenty months they had had no mission to the Swiss Cantons it was in vain to appeal to the precedent of count Capo d'Istria, or of any other chargé d'affaires. If we had suffered nothing during these twenty months, he would ask the noble lord why Mr. Disbrowe should not have been continued? It might indeed be said, that the civil list bill, regulating those missions, had passed. His noble friend the member for Huntingdon had endeavoured to procure a delay in the passing of that bill, by moving a delay in the bringing up of the report. He (Mr. W.) had supported that motion for delay, and therefore there was no inconsistency in his present proposal. The noble lord had, if he rightly understood him, said, that the mission now was put upon the same footing as in 1792. It would be borne in mind, however, that lord Robert Fitzgerald was appointed in 1792, and that being, if not the first year of the war, at least the year immediately previous to its commencement, rendered the case quite different from the present. The noble marquis had indulged, good-humouredly he would allow, in accusations against the proposers of such motions as this; but he hoped the noble marquis would bear in mind that he had encouraged the bringing forward of such proposals. At the very threshold and opening of those discussions with which the House had been occupied, the noble lord had said, and called upon the House to mark his words, that he admitted the general necessity of retrenchment, that he recognised the principle to its full extent, and only wanted to have the particular instances pointed out to him in order that he migh agree to them. Now, he would take the noble marquis on his own ground. He would show that Mr. Disbrowe had performed all the duties upon a salary of 1,595 l. subject to a deduction of 10 per cent, while the new establishment would cost 3,900 l., subject, of course, to the same deduction. Comparing the one of these sums with the other, the continuation of Mr. Disbrowe, which had produced no inconvenience during twenty months, would produce a saving of a considerable sum. This was the sum for the saving of which he con-

665
tended; and he felt that he stood upon strong grounds. It exceeded the salary of either of the lay lords of the Admiralty, or that of the joint-postmaster-general. He had not alluded to this particular case because of any unfitness on the part of the gentleman who held the office, but it ought to be borne in mind that there were others which were in every respect worse. He would have held it unfair to select Mr. Wynn as the sole object against which measures ought to be directed. He was aware that the measures, against which his motion was directed, might be defended on the ground that they had been settled in the year 18l4 or 1815, when the troops of the country had just returned victorious from Waterloo, and the noble marquis had come from his conference with the potentates of Europe. At that time parliament could not refuse the noble marquis any thing which he might choose to ask, but he should doubt whether the noble marquis would hope for such complaisance from the House now. He would like to hear him propose now the building of Dutch fortresses, or the granting of a loan to Prussia. He hoped that he had confined himself to the general question, and that he had so conducted it as not to give unnecessary offence to those against whom it appeared in the particular application to be directed.—The hon. gentleman then moved a series of resolutions, detailing the history of the mission from 1750 down to the present time, to the effect stated in his speech. To the last resolution he begged the particular attention of the House, for it was the only substantial resolution which put the question in issue. It was "That it appears to this House, that without detriment to the public service, the charge of the Mission to the Swiss Cantons might be reduced to a scale of expenditure not exceeding the sum annually received by lord Robert Fitzgerald and Mr. Wickham, from May, 1792 to January, 1798, and for which sum the duties of the said Mission have practically been performed for one year and eight months preceding the recent appointment of Mr. Henry Wynn."
The Marquis of Londonderrysaid, that having had occasion last night to address some observations to the House upon this subject, and considering the very liberal and certainly very fair manner in which the hon. member brought forward the question, he should not think it necessary to trouble the House at any length. He
666
trusted that if the House last night, would not consent to have the estimates generally submitted to a committee last night, they would not take this particular branch of them for inquiry, unless there appeared to be something very incorrect in it. If this part was as correct as the rest, why should it be selected for inquiry? If the House consented to this proposal, how many more would they put at issue on the same principle. It was the more necessary to take their stand here, because it appeared to be one of a series of motions of the same kind. The hon. gentleman had no objection to the individual who filled the office in question; he admitted his station in the country to have fitted him for the office; he admitted, too, that his having had a pension was an additional recommendation. Under these circumstances the selection of Switzerland must appear surprising. This particular choice seemed to have been made from regard to the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Tierney), who would no longer call the president of the board of control (Mr. Wynn), his right hon. friend, though others continued that courtesy towards him. This was the usual practice of the right hon. gentleman, to withdraw his friendship from those who happened to join his majesty's government. In this way only could he account for the particular attention now given to the mission to Switzerland. But it appeared that no sooner should this motion be disposed of, than another hon. member would come forward with a similar, proposition respecting another mission. If, therefore, he last night objected to going before a committee, because, though he had great confidence in committees of that House, he did not think a committee fit for such a purpose, much more must he object to the present proposition. Already Wirtemburg and Bavaria were almost on the notice for addressing the Crown that the missions to them should cease. If, then, it was not the habit of America, that favourite example, to ask such an account of the executive—for a very large sum had been voted that missions might be sent to South America, without inquiring what character of missions or what scale of expense was to be adopted, for Buenos Ayres, for Colombia, Chili, or Peru—were we to become less monarchical than America? The present proposition went to establish the practice, that if it could be proved that an individual had ever received less money on any occasion, or if there

667
had been a cessation in any respect in a mission, then the presumption must be against ministers, and the onus must be thrown on them of justifying their conduct not only in the face of parliament, but in the face of the public at large. If he were to submit to such a practice, the House must indeed think him unfit for his office. An argument more strained than the hon. member's through all his details to establish his conclusion, he had never heard. It was founded, particularly on the case of Mr. Braun, who had been there from 1782, to 1792. When he had adverted to this case last night, he had supposed that this appointment had been a sentence of degradation—a punishment for diplomatic offences. He had since inquired what had been the fact, and when he stated it, it would perhaps decide the question, whether there ought to be a wish to imitate all the circumstances of this case. He was not sure that it would be thought convenient or more economical by the gentlemen opposite, that all dispatches should be written in the French language. Mr. Braun had been an old Swiss officer on half-pay, attached, it was true, to this country. Mr. Norton, whose secretary he had been, had left him behind him there; but why no change had been made for nine years afterwards, he (lord L.) had not been able to ascertain. It might have been done to mark some displeasure felt towards the Swiss Cantons. It was not known what feeling might then have existed towards Switzerland. It was, however, a common mode of showing a feeling of coldness to appoint a minister of inferior rank, or with inferior salary. Those things had often been done; but if the doctrine now contended for were established, it could not happen in future, without the consideration of all its circumstances on the floor of the House. He believed Mr. Braun had been a very honest man; but he could not trace the influence of his mission in that country. From the period of 1792, when hostilities broke out, he could discover nothing to lead him to believe that any valuable consequences had resulted from Mr. Braun's having resided during those years as our minister in Switzerland. He did not think it safe to adopt the plan of the hon. member, and to withdraw our minister at the conclusion of a negotiation, and then wait till an extraordinary courier should announce that the neutrality had been actually violated. He did not believe, that
668
our minister, when sent back, would find the country in the best spirit to co-operate with him. He could not agree to the proposition, that we should not have a minister, unless there should be active employment for him where he resided. It was his business to ascertain what counsels they were about to adopt, and what other counsels might be suggested to them. Upon considering the facts detailed by the hon. member, he would contend that the whole stream of policy was in favour of the present appointment. Mr. Braun had been there from 1783; but in opening his case the hon. member had forgotten the different circumstances in which Mr. Wickham and lord Robert Fitzgerald had occupied the same station. Lord Fitzgerald had been there for four years, from 1792 to 1796, when he was succeeded by Mr. Wickham who, for a short time, had been chargé d'affaires, but was afterwards minister plenipotentiary till the peace of Amiens. But really he was fatiguing the House by proceeding in this argument, since no objection had been made to the individual. He could not see that any ground had been stated for the motion. Though the hon. member had introduced it in a very fair and liberal manner, still he must say that there appeared in other quarters a very uncharitable desire to run down the character of a private individual. He trusted, however, that the House would oppose itself to that desire, and would protect the characters of public men against dark hints and unfounded insinuations. He should not trouble the House with any further observations at present, as he was confident, from the vote of last night, that gentlemen had made up their minds to travel in the paths of their ancestors, which had conducted the country to greatness, power, and honour, and not to deviate from them into principles which were not admitted to be sound even by such states as acknowledged a democratical form of government.
Lord Normanbysaid, that though he contemplated no such effect as the resignation of the foreign secretary, he nevertheless indulged the hope of seeing the noble marquis continue in office, without the appendage of a Swiss Envoy, at an expense to the country of 5,000 l. a year. He disclaimed all personal objections. He did not deny the competency of the gentleman who held that appointment to fulfil the duties, if by any accident duties were imposed on him. But

669
he did resist the extravagant and extra-ordinary salary which he was to receive. For what was that large salary granted? For nothing that he could fancy, but to allow the hon. Envoy to enjoy the rural romance which Swiss scenery afforded, or to indulge those pleasures of a magnificent hospitality, to which the noble marquis, in his speech of last night, had attached such importance.
The previous question was moved on the first resolutions and carried. On the last resolution the House divided: Ayes, 141; Noes, 247. Majority against the motion, 106.

List of the Minority.

Althorp, lord

Fitzroy, lord C.

Abercromby, hon. J.

Frankland, R.

Anson, sir Geo.

Farrand, R.

Bentinck, lord W.

Graham, S.

Burdett, sir F.

Grosvenor, hon. R.

Boughey, sir J.

Grant, J. P.

Bright, H.

Grattan, J.

Birch, Jos.

Grosvenor, gen.

Benett, John

Gurney, R. H.

Browne, Dom.

Griffith, J. W.

Barham, F.

Gaskell, Ben.

Beaumont, T.

Gurney, H.

Benyon, B.

Hotham, lord

Brougham, H.

Hume, Joseph

Barnard, lord

Haldimand, W.

Bennet, hon. H. G.

Heathcote, G.

Barret, S. B. M.

Howard, hon. W.

Belgrave, lord

Hill, lord A.

Bernal, R.

Hornby, E.

Byng, G.

Hurst, Robt.

Baring, H.

Hutchinson, hon. C. H.

Burrell, sir C.

Hobhouse, J. C.

Curwen, J. C.

Honywood, W. P.

Crompton, S.

Hughes, colonel

Campbell, hon. G. P.

James, W.

Carter, John

Johnson; col.

Cavendish, C.

Kennedy, T. F.

Concannon, Lucius

Lethbridge, sir T.

Caulfield, hon. H.

Lamb, hon. G.

Curteis, E. J.

Lester, B. L.

Chaloner, R.

Langston, J. H.

Crespigny, sir W. De

Lennard, T. B.

Colborne, R.

Lockhart, J. I.

Calcraft, J. H.

Leycester, R.

Cavendish, lord G. A. H.

Lemon, sir W.

Lloyd, sir E.

Cavendish, H.

Latouche, Rt.

Calvert, C.

Monck, J. B.

Coffin, sir I.

Maberly, J.

Calvert, N.

Martin, J.

Davies, col.

Mostyn, sir. T.

Denman, Thos.

Mahon, gen.

Denison, W. J.

Maxwell, J.

Ellice, Ed.

Macdonald, J.

Evans, W.

Mackintosh, sir J.

Ellis, hon. G. A.

Marjoribanks, S.

Fergusson, sir R. C.

Marryatt, J.

Fitzgerald, lord W. C.

Moore, Peter

670

Milbank, M.

Stanley, lord

Maberly, J.

Scarlett, J.

Newman, R.

Sefton, lord

O'Callaghan, colonel

Smith, R.

Ord, W.

Smith, W.

Palmer, col. C.

Stuart, lord J.

Power, R.

Sykes, D.

Prittie, hon. F.

Scudamore, R. P.

Pym, F.

Tierney, rt. hon. G.

Palmer, C. F.

Titchfield, marquis of

Peirse, H.

Tavistock, marquis of

Powlett, hon. W. I. F.

Tynte, C. K.

Pryse, P.

Western, J. C.

Ricardo, D.

Wilson, sir R.

Robarts, colonel

Williams, J.

Robinson, sir G.

Whitbread, Sam. C.

Rumbold, C. E.

Wilson, T.

Russell, lord J.

Wood, alderman

Ramsbottom, J.

Williams, W.

Robarts, A. W.

Whitmore, W.

Rice, S.

Whitbread, W. H.

Rickford, W.

White, L.

Ridley, sir M. W.

TELLERS.

Ramsden, J. C.

Warre, J.

Russell, G.

Normanby, lord

IRISH POOR EMPLOYMENT BILL.
Mr. Goulburnrose to move for leave to bring in a bill "for the Employment of the Poor in certain districts in Ireland." The chief object of the measure was, he said, to enable the population to earn their subsistence by their own exertions, as the greatest and most substantial benefit that could be conferred upon them. It was well known, that there many large tracts of land in Ireland utterly impervious, where there was little or no communication, and where crimes were frequent from the means afforded of escape. By the present measure, it was proposed to place a certain sum at the disposal of the lord lieutenant, to be by him applied to the construction of new roads, in those districts where the suffering was most severe. The work, it was intended, should be executed, not under local authority, but by officers appointed immediately by government. A want of means had hitherto prevented the counties in question from undertaking this improvement but as soon as the advantages were realized, and the estimates of their expense submitted to the grand juries, no doubt could be entertained of their disposition to repay the sums advanced.
Sir W. De Crespignyfelt anxious that the benefits of this measure should be rendered permanent.
Mr. S. Ricewarmly approved of the bill, as one of the wisest measures that could be adopted.
Sir E. O'BrienComplimented the

671
liberality of the English people for the manner in which they had come forward, and expressed himself favourable to the bill.
Mr. Broughamwas willing to give his consent to the bill, provided he did not bind himself by so doing to any approbation of the conduct of government, with respect to the affairs of Ireland.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.