Lords Sitting of 1 February 1805

MINUTES.
Counsel were heard, at some length relative to the Scots appeal, Hamilton and others v. Geddes. Their lordships deferred the further consideration of the case till to-morrow.—It was ordered, on the motion of the bishop of Exeter, that the lord bishop of Rochester be requested to preach before their lordships, at the collegiate church of Westminster, on Wednesday the 20th instant, being the day appointed, by his maj.'s, proclamation, for a general fast.—The bills upon the table, all of a private or local description, were forwarded in their respective stages.—On Lord Hawkesbury's moving, that this house do now adjourn,

WAR WITH SPAIN.—
Earl Darnleyrose, not, he said, to oppose the motion, but merely to state what he conceived to

165
be the reason for the noble lord's proposing, that the house should meet to-morrow, namely, that the additional papers relative to the question with Spain, were expected then to be ready to be laid upon the table. In stating that he did not mean to oppose the motion, he begged it to be understood, that he could not at all reconcile the conduct of the noble lord, and of his colleagues in office, in now wishing to push this matter to so early a discussion, to the effect even of taking precedence of another business, of which he (lord D.) had given notice, and which undoubtedly yielded in interest to none, with their previous proceedings and ideas on this subject. All the correspondence, all the papers at all connected with the Spanish question, were in their power and knowledge, and in the power and knowledge of none else. They ought at the beginning to have laid on the table every paper which was at all essential to the forming of a fair judgment on the question. They did lay such papers on the table, and noble lords on the same side of the house with himself made no objection to them, nor demanded any farther production. They were willing to have formed their judgment on the question, on the evidence which ministers themselves had thought sufficient. Now, however, ministers viewed the matter differently, and they had themselves moved for additional papers. To this his 1dp. said he could have no objection; but he must be forgiven for saying, that the conduct of noble lords on the other side, in his respect, did not correspond with that desire for a speedy discussion of the business which they had been so eager to profess: at all events, he could not see on what grounds their own delay, or want of preparation, ought to be esteemed a reason for postponing the motion on another important subject of which he had formerly given notice. He rather conceived the conduct of noble lords in administration, as a servile imitation of the proceedings in another house, which it was unbecoming the dignity of that house to follow, unless on most substantial and necessary grounds.
Lord Mulgraveexpressed his surprise at some of the observations which fell from the noble earl. With respect, however, to the papers and documents in question, he would first say, that they were more voluminous than he had formerly occasion to apprehend, snaking a
166
quantity of not less than 70 printed pages. Every exertion was used to get the papers ready for presentation that day, but it was found impracticable; and it was wished the house should meet to-morrow, for the purpose of laying the papers on the table with the earliest possible opportunity. With respect to the blame which the noble earl seemed to impute to him, for his conduct on the occasion, he must say, he thought no blame could fairly be imputed to him, either for what he had done in the first instance, or in the subsequent proceedings. He had certainly, according to what he had professed, laid every information before the house, which he thought necessary, for the due understanding of the subject. He had professed his anxious wish to have the subject fully and completely before parliament and the public, and on that principle he acted. The idea of producing additional information, it should be recollected, did not originate with him; it was deemed, upon maturer consideration of the topics, to be necessary by other persons, and in other quarters. In conformity, therefore, with the wish to have every degree of information which might be deemed necessary before parliament and the public, it was, that he had proposed the production of the additional documents; and this with as little delay as possible: in which view, and with reference to an early discussion of, and decision upon, the subject, it was proposed to meet to-morrow. Such an attack upon ministers as that proceeding from the noble earl, he had never yet heard of. He had heard of attacks upon ministers, for withholding due information in the first instance, and pertinaciously refusing it afterwards; but never, till that day, did he hear them blamed for wishing to give every possible information upon a. subject. He had heard of attacks upon ministers, for wishing to urge a premature discussion of particular topics; but never, till then, did he hear any ministers arraigned for postponing the day, in order to afford a full and ample interval for deliberation. With respect to the noble earl's idea, that a wish existed with his maj.'s present ministers, to induce a servile imitation, on the part of that house, of the proceedings of the other house of parliament, it was entirely unfounded, Did such a desire manifest itself in an obvious wish to give their lordships as full and complete information upon the

167
subject in question, as that which was proposed to be given to the other house? Did a line of proceeding, obviously intended to enable that house to discuss and decide upon the subject, on at least as early a day as the other house, argue a wish to make their lordships the servile imitators and followers of that house? Certainly not. So much for the assertion of the noble earl on that head, and the wish to meet to-morrow being in strict conformity to every principle laid down by his majesty's ministers in that house for their conduct; with respect to the subject in question, he did not see how any noble lord could consistently object to the proceeding.
Earl Darnleysaid, he did not, nor could he ever have intended to complain, that too much information had been afforded. He would say, however, that it was the duty of ministers to have known what papers were requisite for the discussion of the question; and that they should have come prepared with them in the first instance.—Adjowned.