Mr. Baringsaid, he rose for the purpose of asking a question relating to a matter of considerable importance. A treaty between this country and one of the newly recognized states of South America had been laid on the table. But, it was a remarkable fact, that a most honourable person, an individual of the most deserving description, who had been regularly accredited from one of these states, had not been presented to his majesty. It was rumoured, that this circumstance arose from the interference of certain foreign powers, who were anxious that the recognition of the South American states should be of a mitigated description. Now, he wished to know from the right hon. gentleman whether this omission was merely accidental, or whether it was, as rumour had stated, intentional. A treaty had been laid on the table; but, the minister of the country to which it related had not been received at court. He made this application without the slightest interference of the person to whom it related. While he was on his legs, he wished to ask another question, which was of considerable interest as it affected the feelings of a most gallant and, meritorious class of people—he meant 1474 those English officers who had entered into the military service of foreign states. The House must be aware, that a regulation, founded on an act of parliament which passed a few years ago, still existed, which placed those individuals in a most extraordinary situation. Many of those officers, at the termination of the war, finding their "occupation gone," and being actuated by a strong love for a military life, as well as by a powerful feeling in favour of those sentiments of liberty which they had imbibed in their native country, had embraced an honourable service amongst the troops of those countries that were struggling for freedom, and were, in consequence, by the provisions of the bill to which he had alluded, subject to very considerable injury and inconvenience. In making this observation, he did not mean to call in question the policy of the bill to which he bad referred, because, at the time when it passed, great jealousy existed with respect to the conduct of this country as to the establishment of those new states. Reproaches were cast upon this country, by Spain and France, in consequence of the part which a liberal policy induced it to pursue. It had been strongly urged that the battle of independence, which was at that period fighting, and which had ultimately proved successful, had, in a great measure been carried on by this country. This, certainly, was made a matter of complaint; and though, abstractedly, he did not think that the law then enacted was strictly justifiable, still, looking to all the circumstances, and considering the time, he would not quarrel with the policy in which it originated. The bill, it should be observed, was not to enable the Crown to recal officers from foreign service, but it gave to every paltry informer the right to call before a justice of the peace, any officer who had taken a commission under a foreign state. If the power existed, as he believed it did, in the Crown, to use its discretion in the recal or disqualification of officers, why should this additional. power be suffered to exist? The law to which he referred imposed a degradation—imposed a very severe punishment—on persons who might contravene its provisions; and yet, there was not a gentleman who heard him, who must not view with the highest respect the conduct of those individuals, and who must not esteem them, on account of the noble motives by which they were actuated 1475 [hear]. It was quite clear, that the bill had been introduced, not from any personal motives, but on principles of public policy. The state of things which had given rise to it having, however, passed away—England having recognized the independence of several of those states—it was, he conceived, proper, that the law should be altered [hear]. Subjects of this country had, in periods of peace, held high commands in the French service. We had supplied admirals to Russia, and officers of various descriptions to Austria, Spain, and Portugal. In his opinion, it was of great importance to the military power of this country, that English officers should, in times of peace, be enabled to keep up their military knowledge, by entering into the service of foreign states. He knew that, at the present moment, France was pursuing this system. That country was pushing her military officers into every possible kind of service. They were employed in Greece, in Turkey, in every situation where their abilities were likely to be matured. The French pursued this course, on, as he conceived, the wisest and best of all policy. He had submitted these few observations, merely for the consideration of his majesty's government, and he trusted they would remedy the evil to which he had called their attention. If they did not, he would in the next session (and he did not mention the matter in the way of threat) make a motion on the subject.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, he was extremely sorry that the hon. gentleman had put his questions during the absence of his right hon. friend (Mr. Canning). He could not state the circumstances which had prevented Mr. Lempriere from being presented to his majesty, but he could assure the hon. gentleman that the course hitherto pursued by his majesty's government was not, and would not be, in the slightest respect, altered by the interference of other powers. With respect to the other point, he thought it was perfectly fair that his majesty should have the power of preventing the enlistment of British officers in the service of foreign states, and he did not think that the right to punish them which was given by the act referred to, was at all improper. It was quite clear, that they had not suffered much under the law; for, he believed, not a single instance had occurred in which the power of laying an information had been acted on.