HC Deb 01 July 1835 vol 29 cc132-5
Lord John Russell

presented copies of the minutes taken before Sir F. Roe, at Wolverhampton.

Sir Henry Hardinge

said—having previously communicated to the noble Lord my intention of putting a question to him on this subject, I shall take the opportunity of doing so at once. It will be in the recollection of the House that when the matter was last before it, certain reflections were cast upon the military in reference to their conduct at Wolverhampton, and that the noble Lord was induced by these reflections to change his original intention of having no inquiry, and to institute an inquiry, of which the papers he has just laid on the Table are the result. I shall not press the noble Lord to give an immediate answer to the question which I am about to put; but I must express my opinion that it is desirable for the maintenance of due discipline in the army that men who have been made to labour under disadvantages such as those under which the military engaged at Wolverhampton are now labouring, should be allowed to remain exposed to them for as short a time as possible. I would also say that I think it incumbent on the executive Government of the country not to allow the House of Commons to usurp their functions, but to give an opinion of their own upon a matter such as this. I trust, therefore, that the noble Lord will at some period give me an opinion on the part of the Government as to whether the Government are satisfied or dissatisfied with the conduct of the military at Wolverhampton.

Lord John Russell

In moving that the minutes of evidence which I have just laid on the Table be printed, I shall answer the question which the right hon. Gentleman has put to me. It is quite true that this inquiry was instituted in consequence of a wish, and what appeared to me to be a very general wish, expressed on the part of the House. I stated at the time that the inquiry was an unusual one, and that objections might be urged to such a course of proceeding, but that at the same time the wish of the House appeared to me so manifest, that I thought it my duty to agree to it. The inquiry accordingly was instituted; Sir Frederick Roe proceeded to Wolverhampton, and with that knowledge of evidence, and with that judgment in points such as those which were likely to be brought before him, for which he is so remarkable, he conducted it, I believe, to the satisfaction of the inhabitants of that town. On his return to London he informed me that there was one part of the inquiry into which he had not gone fully—namely, that respecting the conduct of Captain Manning in dividing his troop, amounting to about thirty men, into small bodies for the purpose of patrolling. He informed me that he considered that to be a military matter, and one on which it was not competent for him to enter. In consequence of that communication, in order that Captain Manning might not want the means of stating every thing which he desired to state in reference to the part which he had performed at Wolverhampton, I wrote to the Commander-in-Chief, requesting that I might obtain information on those points which Sir F. Roe had not thought it his duty to investigate. I received an answer from Lord Hill on the following day, containing the replies of Captain Manning to the questions put to him on the execution of his duty as a military man. I consider that this inquiry has been undertaken at the wish of the House of Commons, and I now merely lay both the whole of the evidence taken before Sir Frederick Roe, and the answers of Captain Manning, before the House; but if it be thought necessary by any Member of the House to raise any further question upon the subject, I shall then be prepared to give the reasons on which I ground the decided opinion which I enter- tain, and which I now express, that the conduct of the military at Wolverhampton was marked by a most commendable forbearance and a most correct judgment. I will not pretend to say (for there is a quantity of contradictory testimony in this vast mass of evidence) that among the thirty men there may not have been one or two who did not act with that complete control which was observable in the body generally; but that is simply matter of doubt, and as such alone I mention it. It may possibly, I repeat, be the case, that one or two men may not have acted with that complete self-control which is desirable on all such occasions; but with regard to the conduct of the troops in general, and with regard to the conduct of the commanding officer, I think that those who read this evidence will be of opinion, that being called on to perform a most painful and difficult duty—a duty which the military would not on any occasion seek, but which they are called on to perform for the support of the civil power and the tranquillity of the country—they did perform that duty in such a manner as at once to obtain the result of preventing the peace of the town from being seriously disturbed, and of preventing the occurrence of injury to property and life, and at the same time to exhibit the utmost forbearance towards those whom they were directed to disperse. I move now that these papers be printed.

Sir H. Hardinge

I am sure that the House and the public, and the profession to which I have the honour to belong, will entertain the universal feeling that nothing can be more satisfactory, more manly, and more straight-forward than the explanation of the noble Lord.

Mr. Villiers

said, he could not help thinking that, before so confident an opinion had been expressed by the noble Lord with respect to the evidence which had just been laid upon the Table, and before the hon. Baronet had complimented him for so doing, that it would have been more satisfactory to the House if time had been allowed for Members to have read the evidence themselves. He (Mr.Villiers) was not in a situation now, more than upon the last occasion when he addressed the House, to say whether the noble Lord was justified in the opinion that he had expressed respecting the conduct of the soldiers, and therefore he could merely say that, judging from the only evidence that had as yet been before the public, he did not think the terms "commendable forbearance" did entirely apply to the conduct of the soldiers during the late disturbance.

An Hon. Member,

as a personal friend of Captain Manning, could state it to be the wish of that Gentleman that the evidence should be as soon as possible in the hands of hon. Members, in order that a decision might be formed upon his military conduct.

Mr. Walter

observed, that having the honour of Captain Manning's acquaintance he would venture to assert that a more humane, considerate, and prudent man did not exist.

Motion agreed to.