Lords Sitting of 17 April 1815

GENOA.
Earl Grey Earl Grey moved for several papers respecting Genoa, to the production of which he understood that there was no objection.
The Earl of Liverpoolsaid, that he felt no objection to the production of the papers moved for by the noble earl, many of which it was intended to have laid before the House with the other papers on the table upon this subject, had they been in preparation.
Earl Greyobserved, that from some of the documents on the table, a very extraordinary power appeared to have been granted, or at least exercised, by an individual minister (alluding, as we understood, to lord Castlereagh), and at this power he felt the more surprised, because the transfer of the powers of the Executive Government to any minister, at a
[646
foreign court, struck him as utterly inconsistent with the practice of the British Government, and decidedly hostile to the principles of our constitution.
The Earl of Liverpooldeclined to enter at present into the subject alluded to by the noble lord, but observed that any minister was warranted in acting upon the instructions of his Sovereign, and that it was notoriously not unusual to give directions, and grant powers to a foreign minister to conduct and conclude the most important transaction; such a practice, no doubt, might, to a certain extent, be deemed a transfer of the powers of the Executive Government.
Earl Greyadmitted the propriety and practice stated by the noble Secretary upon any contingency or expected event, but declared that he had never heard, and he denied the propriety of investing any minister with a discretionary power to exercise the authority of the Executive Government upon any event that might arise, however unexpected, and such authority appeared to him to have been exercised by the minister alluded to.
The motion was agreed to.

CONGRESS AT VIENNA.
Marquis Wellesleythought that it would be much more consistent with the dignity of that House, as well as with the magnitude and importance of the subject, that ministers, instead of waiting for questions from that side of the House, should come forward and present, for the satisfaction of their lordships, a general exposition of all the circumstances connected with the great transaction at Vienna, in which they had been so long engaged, together with the papers necessary to illustrate that transaction. He wished to know whether ministers intended to lay such an exposition before the House, and when it was likely to be brought forward, or whether they proposed to wait until the negociations in which they were engaged had terminated, or a treaty had been concluded? Such an exposition he thought highly desirable, in order that at such a crisis as the present, that House, the country, and the world might know what system ministers and the Allies had evinced a disposition to support—that before the British Parliament had concluded the dreadful pledge of war, it should be seen whether they were supporting the same principles for which the British nation had been struggling for twenty-five

647]
years, or for any other system—whether for a system of general justice and permanent peace, or for a system of gross injustice likely to lead to perpetual hostility; whether the arrangements in the contemplation of the Allies were calculated to put an end to the calamities which had so long afflicted mankind, or to produce still greater evils. On these grounds the noble lord thought that the exposition alluded to was due to the character and interest of our own Government, and to the common cause of the Allies.
The Earl of Liverpooldeclared, that it was the anxious wish of his Majesty's ministers to lay before Parliament, as soon as circumstances permitted, a full exposition of their conduct in the great transaction alluded to by the noble marquis, whatever might be the result of that transaction. Two branches of that transaction, tie negociations respecting which were completed, had already been brought under the consideration of that House, and he assured their lordships that as soon as the other arrangements were definitively settled they would be submitted to the judgment of the Legislature. But until those arrangements were concluded, and pending a negociation, attended, especially at present, with embarrassing circumstances, he trusted their lordships must feel that he could not be authorized in entering into the question stated by the noble marquis—that he would not be warranted in presenting the House with partial views, or premature information. But when the case should be complete, be could declare for himself and his colleagues, that it would afford them the greatest satisfaction to lay the fullest information before the House, and he had no doubt of being able in due time to satisfy their lordships that his Majesty's Government had not supported any system inconsistent with justice, or with those principles which had been recognised, by the greatest statesmen this country had ever known.
Marquis Wellesleysaid, that the noble earl had admitted the necessity of having a complete view of the whole arrangement before any one branch of it could be with advantage discussed, and before an accurate and just opinion could be formed respecting it: but then the whole was not completed, and he supposed he must wait for that period for which the noble earl professed to be so anxious, be fore he could expect any thing like a general view of the arrangements. The
[648
noble earl himself had, however, recognized the principle, that some points were so prominent that, they ought to be brought forward without delay. He had produced papers relative to one or two of the branches before the completion of the whole; and unquestionably some particulars were of such vast importance, and so loudly, demanded a prompt attention, that they must be considered an exception to the general rule. Admitting, then, the advantage of having the whole arrangements in their view before they attempted to form a decisive opinion on any one branch, he should be much disposed to wait till the conclusion, before he entered upon the discussion of any particular part, unless, indeed, the period should be so long protracted as to make it impossible to wait for that, of which it would be impossible to say when it might terminate: but at the same time exceptions must be made as to certain prominent points, and one of these points which demanded instant attention was the arrangements with respect to Saxony. It was due to the justice, the dignity, the honour of the country, that this should be brought under their lordships consideration. As the matter appeared at present, we had taken the judgment seat, and pronounced sentence upon the head of a venerable legitimate Sovereign of an ancient family, of whom, whatever might have been his errors, it might be said that few had adopted a more wise and beneficent system of government than he had done with regard to his own subjects. A cabinet minister acting for the Government bad been, sent out, and it appeared from certain information which had been received, that we had really taken the judgment-seat, and avowedly proceeded against a legitimate Sovereign on penal principles! But though we had thus taken the judgment-seat, even supposing it were to administer justice, it could not be said that it was to administer justice in mercy. This was a transaction which, for the honour of the nation, must not be allowed to rest any longer in silence. The attention of their lordships and the country must be called to it, and that without a moment's unnecessary delay. It was for these reason that he now wished to communicate his intention of submitting a proposition to their lordships on that head, at no distant period, when he should perhaps move to some further information connected with that particular point.
The Earl of Darnleycomplained of the delay in producing the documents which the House bad ordered in compliance with his motion before the recess, with respect to our naval administration in the course of the American war.
Viscount Melvillejustified the delay, by stating, that in order to comply with the noble earl's motion it became necessary to refer for information to our officers on Lake Ontario, and also to read overall the correspondence of the Admiralty for two or three years.

ADDRESS ON THE TREATY OF PEACE WITH AMERICA.
The Earl of Liverpoolrose to move an Address to the Prince Regent, approving of the Treaty of Peace concluded with the United States of America. As he did not anticipate any opposition, he did not think it at all necessary or proper to detain their lordships for any long time on this subject, or to enter upon any discussion of topics with respect to which he was aware that much difference of opinion prevailed. Their lordships were aware that the war arose from disputes originating in certain orders commonly called the Orders in Council. Before the American declaration of war arrived in this country, those orders had been repealed; and as it was presumed, that, upon notice of this circumstance, the Americans would be desirous of returning to a state of peace, such directions were given as might facilitate that object, and render the evils necessarily connected with a state of warfare as light as possible till an arrangement could be concluded The Americans, however, did not, it appeared, wish to return to a state of peace and when the cause of complaint was removed they changed their ground, and insisted that we should give up that right which, by the well-known and admitted law of nations, we had to seize our own subjects, and claim their services in time of war, wherever we found them. This was a clear principle of the law of nations which we only claimed in common with every other nation. We claimed nothing from the Americans, we did not insist that they should acknowledge any new doctrines and principles of the law of nations set up by us. But they, on the contrary, set up new doctrines and new principle of their own, and insisted that we should adopt them, and sacrifice rights which we considered as essential to our own security. The consequence was, that the
[650
necessity of the war on our part was universally felt, and a unanimity was manifested on the subject which was very rarely found on such occasions. It was not till the 7th of August that the American commissioners received instructions not to insist upon this point, and then the negociation proceeded. As to the mediation of the Emperor of Russia, there were certain points on which one would not choose to accept even of mediation, because it often happened that in mediations there was something like arbitration. With respect to our maritime rights, we never could accept of arbitration. He would not go the length of saying that we ought under no circumstances to accept of mediation with respect to our maritime rights; but this did not appear to be an instance in which it was desirable to accept of any such mediation. It had been said, that while we rejected mediation on one point, we had agreed to arbitration on another. But the points were totally different, and the mode of arbitration appeared to be the best way of settling the disputes about the boundaries. America then having given up the point for which she had carried on the war, the negociation, as he had said, proceeded; and he contended that there might be circumstances under which we might, in justice to our own subjects, insist upon terms for which it would not be proper originally to go to war. That, however, was a consideration of expediency. But a principle of good faith required that the Indians should be included in the Treaty, and they were included. As to the Slave Trade, the objects of the two governments were the same; as to commerce, it appeared most proper to leave these matters to subsequent arrangement, and that the most liberal principles of commercial intercourse would be the most advantageous for both countries. As to territorial arrangements, the best mode of proceeding had been adopted on that head that could be devised. It appeared more advantageous to call in the arbitration of one who might be supposed to be impartial, than to leave the matter to the decision of the lot; and upon that, the arrangements for setting the tine had been adopted. On the whole, the noble earl considered the Treaty as equally honourable and advantageous to this country; and concluded by moving an Address to the Prince Regent, assuring his Royal Highness of the great satisfaction felt by the House at the

651]
terms and conditions of the Treaty of Peace concluded between Great Britain and the United States of America.
Earl Stanhopesaid, that he could not allow this opportunity to pass, without adverting shortly to the high and even impudent language which he had so often heard upon what were called our maritime rights. The noble secretary had, however, stated, that we claimed no rights which did not belong to all independent nations. But the fact was obviously otherwise, for this right of search, so much contended for, belonged only to belligerent nations, and not to those at peace. Thus, if Denmark should unjustly declare against Sweden, she might, according to this pretended right of search, claim to search our ships and those of other nations for Danish subjects. Would this be endured? But the pretension was quite preposterous. Yet America, when at peace with the world, was condemned to have her shipping subjected to the most vexatious search by British cruizers, because this Country was at war with France. Bat now that this country was at peace (would to God he could hope that it would long so continue!) and America was at war with Algiers, the tables being thus turned, would British ships submit, according to the right alleged by the noble secretary, to be searched by American cruizers? If commodore Rodgers, for instance, were to meet one of our convoys at sea Hear! hear, from lord Liverpool]. Yes, he would ask, if commodore Rodgers undertook to search for American seamen, and under the prevalent practice, according to this alleged right, the commodore himself was to be the judge in the exercise of authority, he might take out-five or six seamen, whom he supposed American, from a merchant vessel—what then was likely to be the consequence? Why, the vessel might go to the bottom for want of being manned, and how would the merchants like that? and the merchants had been among the most clamorous upon this point when the assertion of it operated against others; but the fact was, that this right, if even well founded, was liable to so much abuse in the application of it, that it was evidently necessary to come to some explanation, and arrangement upon the subject, that by some negotiation it should be endeavoured to do away with the exercise of it altogether.
The Marquis of Lansdowneexpressed
[652
his concurrence with the terms of the Address, but strongly condemned the unnecessary delay that had taken place in the conclusion of the Treaty, which Treaty, by-the-by, had left unsettled all the points for which the war had been commenced, as would appear upon reference to the published Declaration of ministers at the outset. Yet while these points were waved, new claims were started at the commencement of the negociation, which were abandoned also. But still he rejoiced in the conclusion of peace. The noble marquis concluded with observing, that he understood the American ministers at Ghent proposed an article pledging both powers to treat all vessels as pirates which should be found engaged in the Slave Trade, but that this article was resisted by our commissioners; and this resistance he conceived the more extraordinary from the instructions to our minister at Vienna to promote the universal abolition of that odious traffic.
The Earl of Liverpoolspoke in explanation, and assured the noble marquis and the House, that what had been stated of the proposition as made by the American ministers respecting the Slave Trade, was totally unfounded. Until that moment, through any channel whatever, either public or private, he had never heard a word of such a proposition. The article, as it stood, was originally proposed by the British commissioners, and to which the American ministers never proposed any addition.
The Marquis of Lansdownesaid, that he had received the statement which he had communicated to the House, from what he conceived the very highest authority, which he had no objection to name.
The motion for the Address was then agreed to, nem. diss.