Sir T. Leth-bridgewished to take the opportunity of asking a question of the chancellor of the Exchequer. What he was now going to address to the right hon. gentleman had reference to a question which he had asked of him some eight or ten days ago, and upon which, not having been then satisfied, he was most anxious to obtain a full explanation. This question was the more necessary, in consequence of what had recently occurred in another place, where statements made by a noble lord, formerly the colleague of the right hon. gentleman, had made it more incumbent than ever on that right hon. gentleman, for the clearing up of the doubts which beset his mind, and that of the country at large, to give some explanation of the circumstances which led to the dissolution of the late, and the formation of the present, administration. His question went to this—whether the right hon. gentleman was or was not in communication with the leader or leaders of his late opponents in that House, and whether or not overtures had been made by those leader or leaders to join and support his measures, if he should be placed at the head of the government of the country? That, he believed, was the substance of the question; and, in the answer, if he understood it rightly, the right hon. gentleman admitted fully, that he had received such a communication from such leader or leaders, or words to 931 that effect. He believed he was correct in assuming that the right hon. gentleman made such an admission. But, at the same time, he had asked, when it was the right hon. gentleman had received the communication in question; and, as he saw no impropriety in pressing the question, he trusted the right hon. gentleman would give such an answer as would satisfy the country. The right hon. gentleman, he was sure, had too much candour to complain of his pressing this question, and he was not sure that he should not entitle himself to the right hon. gentleman's thanks by the course which he was pursuing. What he asked was—when these overtures were made, if they had been communicated by the right hon. gentleman to his majesty? if they had been communicated, and when, to his former colleagues, or any of them? These queries he put thus distinctly, that there might be no misunderstanding as to terms, and he hoped to receive such an answer as would satisfy his mind, the mind of the House, and lead to a more clear understanding of that transaction, which it was so necessary to the right hon. gentleman's character to have well understood.
Mr. N. Calvertsaid, he had been of opinion for some time, that the hon. baronet was taking a course which was irregular, and exceedingly inconvenient; and in this surmise he was strengthened by the conclusion of the hon. baronet's voluminous question. Too much of the public time had been already wasted upon these desultory and useless discussions; and, therefore, if the right hon. gentleman took his advice, he would not make a single observation in reply to the question.
§ Mr. Canning.—Sir, I would cheerfully comply with the suggestion of the hon. gentleman who has just addressed you, but for the conclusion of the hon. baronet's speech. I must take the liberty of dividing that speech into two parts; that which related to certain queries which were propounded by him on a former day, and that which comprised the series of questions he has now first suggested. If I should be, however, no more fortunate in my endeavours to convey to his mind my answer to those new questions, than I seem to have been in respect of the old ones, I am afraid I shall occupy the time of the House to very little purpose. Now, Sir, in the first place, I did not, on a former occasion, admit to him what he is pleased to state as the substance of my admission. 932 To the question he then put, I distinctly answered "No." And I again repeat, that, if by "communication," he means, in effect, negotiation, I have now the same answer to make, "No." I had no letter whatever from those parties, of the description to which he has alluded. But, a letter written by a certain eminent person to a friend of his, was undoubtedly shewn to me. Whether the shewing of that letter to a third party, the hon. baronet will be inclined to consider as a breach of confidence, I am not prepared to say; but, from it, I did collect the favourable intentions which the writer was disposed to entertain towards me. But the hon. baronet must give me leave to say, that he is exceedingly mistaken indeed, if he supposed, that I have received no other letters of the same tendency. I am afraid, he would be extremely mortified, if he were to see the number of such letters which come to me. I receive them daily, though I do not think that the hon. baronet has any, the least, right in the world to ask me, from whom or to what precise effect; but, unquestionably, I apprehend that I could "Sear his eyes and blast his heart," if I were to show him the whole of this correspondence. As to the new questions put forth by the hon. baronet, on the present occasion, I shall, after referring him to what passed on a former day, adopt the advice of an hon. gentleman opposite. I will not answer him one word. I will not answer him—not because there are not many honourable individuals, who could answer him for me, but because I think it well becomes the dignity of this House to get back, at length, to old parliamentary usage; and not to waste its hours on discussions of this irregular and extraneous character. I think we ought to know who are our opponents; and, if the hon. baronet be not, himself, the one great parliamentary phœnix, I challenge him to bring forward his compeer, and let them boldly avow their opposition.
Mr. Broughamsaid, he entirely concurred with the right hon. gentleman as to the propriety of getting back, without delay, to parliamentary usage. He, for one, was of opinion, that questions of this kind, whatever might be the tone and manner in which they were put, were really suggested for the sake of exciting discussions, which could only prove unfair, irregular, and therefore, ought never to be encouraged. This was not the only 933 House in which such questions had been of late propounded, with the ostensible purpose of satisfaction, not only to parliament, but to the country at large. Now, it of course became him to speak of the absent with all becoming respect; but, from what he had not only heard others say in another place, but from what he had heard said of them, he could only express his unfeigned regret, that a prayer, which he had heard yesterday solemnly preferred, had not hitherto been fulfilled. He could only express his sorrow that it had not yet pleased Divine Providence "to endue all the nobility with grace, wisdom, and understanding" [a laugh]. That a portion of the nobility was so endued he had no manner of doubt; but even if he were willing to suppose that nine tenths of them were so gifted, he concealed from himself or from the House, that the remaining portion of that illustrious body was still in a condition to require the prayers of the church. He took this opportunity of declaring, that he should still continue the cordial support which he had hitherto given to his majesty's present government; for, notwithstanding the implied censure of the hon. baronet, he had never yet heard it authentically stated, that it was unconstitutional, to say the least of it, for persons not in any way officially connected with the government, the principles, and the members of which possessed their approbation and confidence, to tender to that government their general support. As a friend to the constitution he should continue to tender, wholly unconnected as he was with office, such aid, and to give to the administration the most cordial, as well as vigorous, support it might be in his power to afford them. In all charity, therefore, he could not help expressing to the hon. baronet his own wish—he believed it to be the wish also of the House—he knew it to be the desire of the country, and he could imagine no reason why it should not be the desire of his majesty's government also, that this his prayer to the hon. baronet should not be acceded to—he could not help expressing his wish, his entreaty, that the hon. baronet, and those with whom he acted, would abandon the irregular, unparliamentary, and, to a certain degree, unfair, ungenerous, and unjustifiable mode of carrying on their warfare with his majesty's government. He implored the hon. baronet, rather to come 934 forward at once with a specific question. Let the hon. baronet name his day, let him give his notice, and no doubt every hon. member would cheerfully stand out of the way for so important a discussion. Let his majesty's government be fairly put upon their trial before the House and the country, on a distinct and regular parliamentary question; and he, for one, on such a question, should be delighted to meet the hon. baronet and his friends.
§ Sir T. Lethbridgesaid, he did not wish to provoke discussion, but he had received no answer to the question, upon the subject of the overtures made to the right hon. gentleman. He wished to know distinctly, whether the right hon. gentleman had made his colleagues acquainted with the overtures, or negotiations, which were made to him by the leader of their political opponents. He would ask that House, whether, as a man of honour, the right hon. gentleman was not bound to communicate that overture to his colleagues the moment he received it?
§ Mr. Canning.—It may be convenient to the hon. baronet to know, what I have before stated, but which I now repeat with the utmost sincerity, that I will not answer a single question relative to the late transactions, unless it be brought forward as a motion. Not a single one—and I appeal to the House and the country, whether I am not justified in this course? But, in saying that nothing shall induce me to answer another question, I must and do protest against the hon. baronet or any other man's taking advantage of my silence, to put answers into my mouth. That he has no right to do [cheers].
The discussion here dropped.