Sitting of 28 April 1806

IMPEACHMENT OF LORD MELVILLE
The Speaker stated, that to-morrow, being appointed for the trial by impeachment of lord viscount Melville, he purposed being at the house precisely at ten o'clock; and, if the attendance of the members allowed him to take the chair at a quarter past ten, he should then give orders to the proper officers to

929
clear the passages, and to summon the members. At half past ten, the managers of the impeachment would go forth and take their places at the bar. The members would then be called over by counties, and proceed accordingly.

INCREASED PAY OF THE NAVY.
Mr. Vansittartbrought up the report of the committee of supply, for granting additional pay to the navy. On the question being put, that the resolution be read a 2d time,
Lord Garlie'srose, not to oppose the resolution, but, as the noble lord who had brought this question before the house had expressed his readiness to listen with attention to whatever should be said on the subject, to propose some considerations by way of amendment to this measure. He approved of the intention on the part of the noble lord to ameliorate the situation of those employed in the naval service; and felt highly gratified by the attention the noble lord had given to the subject; but he was disposed to go somewhat farther, and thought, that two amendments he had to propose would render still more complete the system of encouragement and amelioration proposed by the noble lord. The first amendment he would propose, was that the first lieutenants of the line of battle ships, in order to render them superior to lieutenants of inferior rates, and of their juniors in point of service, be allowed 1s. per day above the ordinary pay of lieutenants. He proposed, that those having 6 years seniority should be admitted to this distinction. The additional expence would not be above 5 or 6l. a day, which was a trifling consideration in comparison of the advantages that, in his opinion, would be derived from it. The next amendment he had to propose respected the petty officers. At present they were eight or ten in number on hoard each ship. The noble lord had stated his intention to increase their number. This however, he thought, would introduce considerable inconvenience. Instead of augmenting the number of the present class of petty officers, it would be better to introduce a new class, and to make that description of men, so useful on board a ship, and known by the appellation of quarter-gunners, rank with the petty officers, giving them 1s. per day in addition to their present pay. There was one generally to every four guns: the additional expence, even in a first rate, would be very inconsiderable. There was
930
another description of seamen also, to whom a sufficient encouragement was not held out in money; he would therefore recommend that the Greenwich out-pension, in case of their deaths, be held out to their widows, orphans, or mothers. This would be an inducement to them to remain in the service, and would make up, in some measure, for their small pay. In the observations he had made, his lordship did not wish to be understood as indicating any inclination to oppose ministers; on the contrary he had communicated to the first lord of the admiralty all the observations he had now stated, as well as those on a former night, previously to the estimates being laid before the house. This deference, he thought, was becoming in a professional man, and due on all occasions to a first lord of the admiralty. As a proof that he was not disposed to urge any question in Opposition to ministers, or entertained any wish to embarrass them, he had, on a former occasion, declined urging the thanks of the house to sir David Baird and sir H. Popham, when he found the proposition contrary to the inclination of ministers, though he thought those meritorious officers had deserved very highly of their country. The noble lord then was proceeding to read his amendments in form, when
The Speakerreminded the noble lord, that the subject before the house was a resolution, granting his majesty a certain sum. This grant might either be approved of, or the resolution might be thrown out, but it could admit of no restriction. If the sum Was granted, it must remain at the disposal of the crown.
Lord Howickwas of opinion, that the only mode of proceeding proper for the noble lord, if he persisted in the amendments he had adverted to, would be to propose new estimates, agreeably to the alterations he wished to introduce. He spoke in high terms of the candour of the noble lord, and could not suspect him of a wish to oppose ministers, except where he should feel it his duty to do so. He had to return thanks to the noble lord for the suggestions with which he had furnished him, and had given them all consideration before he had laid the subject before the house. In the propositions he had laid before the house, however, he had not acted without communications from the first naval authorities, from which description he certainly did not exclude the noble lord, though he had thought it eligible to

931
omit the suggestions he had then made, and which he had now submitted to the house in the form of amendments. He then adverted in a few words to the propositions offered by the noble lord, though the forms of the house did not at present admit them as the subjects of this discussion. He denied that lieutenants of first rates had at present no advantage over lieutenants of inferior rates, as they had the chance of being appointed masters and commanders, an advantage that was not open to other lieutenants. To make a distinction of seniority and rank might be attended with inconvenience, as those who were first lieutenants to day, might be second or third next day, from any new arrangement in the appointment of the captains or the ships themselves. Such a measure would create a considerable difficulty in making such arrangements, which were sometimes highly necessary. He did not know, besides, that there was any greater degree of responsibility in the lieutenant of a first rate, than was attached to the lieutenant of any other rate, and in some instances he believed not so much; and as a proof of the superior advantages they enjoyed, he stated that the first lieutenants engaged in all the late victories had in general been created masters or commanders. He did not approve of adding to the number of petty officers; and apprehended the noble lord must have been mistaken, if he conceived it was his intention to add to them to any considerable extent. If he had intended so to increase the number of this class of officers, the estimate he had laid before the house would have been quite inadequate. He did not mean more than 15, taking in captains of the top, &c. to a first rate, and so downward in proportion; the whole at an average of ten to a ship.—The resolution was then read a 2d time, and the report agreed to.

PROPERTY DUTY BILL.
Mr. Kerseeing a noble lord in his place, wished to refer to him for information respecting the property tax. He was aware that formerly foreigners had not contributed to this tax. As there were many however of that description who had an interest in the funds of this country, and as that tax was made to fall so heavy on the subjects of this country, he wished to know if the noble lord had it in design to make any exemptions in their favour, or to include them under the general tax? That the house
932
might have a proper understanding on this subject, and know the amount and value of those exemptions by comparing them with those under the former tax; he would move for a document which he thought highly necessary for the information of the house. The hon, member then moved, "that there be laid before the house, an account of the amount of all exemptions in favour of foreigners, in respect of the duty on stock in any of the funds of G. Britain, or on dividends in the East-India or South-Sea companies."
Lord H. Pettydid not oppose the production of the paper, but thought it would be unfair to lay a tax on those who were not represented in that house, and that it would be equally contrary to the rules of sound policy.
Mr. Rosethought the hon. member's motion ought to have been for an account of the stock held by foreigners in the different funds of this country, as in that case the amount of the exemptions would be easily calculated. would object to any measure leading to subject foreigners to the operation of the property tax; not however, on their account, but on our own, as it must be obvious that the consequence of such a measure would be their withdrawing their property to the funds of other countries in Europe, a circumstance that was not at all desirable for this country.
Mr. Franciscould see no danger of that sort, nor did he know any other country in which they could lodge their money with equal security. He thought, that upon every principle of justice, the property of foreigners ought to contribute to the expence of its protection. Besides, this distinction would impose an. additional difficulty in the collection of the tax, as it would not be easy to ascertain what part really belonged to foreigners.
Mr. Huskissonsaid, that foreigners might withdraw their money and place it either in the Irish bank or in the American funds.—The motion was then agreed to.

AFFAIRS OF INDIA.
Mr. Paullrose and said:—Sir, as several gentlemen were not present, when I had the honour to present the First Charge, upon which hereafter I mean to move for the Impeachment of the marquis of Wellesley; and as many gentlemen are even ignorant of the allegations contained in that charge, before I apply evidence to the fact, and state the grounds upon which I tan entitled to the printing of the charge, such gentlemen

933
may be of opinion that the charge had better be read; however, this to me is matter of perfect indifference; having made the charge, I am capable of arguing upon it, and applying the facts; and as the wish of the house seems rather against the reading, I shall proceed to state the reasons why the charge ought now to be printed.—I certainly, sir, could wish to blot from my recollection, if possible, till disgraceful scene that occurred, when I presented this charge to the house of commons; but that scene, if it were possible for me to forget it, will not be forgotten or forgiven by the dispassionate and thinking part of the people of England; or the injury, sir, that one of the representatives sustained, whilst in the act of bringing forward their cause, certainly no cause of my own; whilst endeavouring to bring to condign punishment, a delinquent most powerfully protected, and whose profusion, whose extravagance, whose corruption, prodigality and waste, have grievously added, and will still add greatly to the burthens of the people of this country; but, sir, that nobleman cannot now escape, and had he taken sanctuary in the bosom, instead of the house of the premier of England, even that, sir, could not now secure him from the hand of justice.—It has been said, sir, I do not know for what purpose, or for what end, that I came into this house purposely to accuse the marquis of Wellesley; I do not think it necessary either to admit or deny the fact; but, if such was my motive, I can only say, that it was rather more disinterested than generally happens in these days of corruption; but, considering the quarter from which the remark proceeded (from Mr. Wellesley Pole) and the tone, temper, and gesticulation (however unparliamentary in which it was conveyed), I appreciate the observations as I ought; but if such a motive could be questionable, I appeal to the house and to the public to decide between my motives and conduct, compared with that of the relatives of the marquis of Wellesley.—I wish at present to throw no reflection on the character of the hon. the Knight of the Bath (sir Arthur Wellesley); on his courage, none can be thrown; but I think he has not consulted what was due to his fair fame, to his prudence, or to the situation in which he himself stands, in becoming, in this stage of the discussion, in which he had so large a share, the defender, sir, of measures declared worthy of Impeachment
934
in this house; and to say the least, in which the hon. but in discreet Knight of the Bath, was an accessary to many of the facts and proceedings stated as most culpable, most reprehensible, and deserving of the most severe punishment. Has the Marhatta War ever yet been justified? Has the marquis of Wellesley been exonerated from the breach of the laws of his country? Has any man, feeling strongly for his reputation, desired an hon. gent. (Mr. Francis) to retract his assertions; not, sir, confined to speeches in parliament, but printed and circulated out of doors, with the name of the author? No, sir; no friend of lord Wellesley's has dared to question the facts I allude to, or to desire the hon. gent. and 29 directors, to substantiate such facts, or to retract declarations so solemnly urged.—The conduct of the marquis Wellesley's friends is particularly deserving of notice. Whilst facts are asserted and the proofs are called for, but not actually produced, they pretend to court enquiry, and are clamorous for investigation; but when transactions are described as unjust and iniquitous; when acts are asserted as having originated in fraud, and ended in murder; when the papers are produced to substantiate the facts; to what shifts are the friends of the marquis of Wellesley driven? They are indignant at accusation; but sit quietly under the proofs adduced on the motions of the treasurer of the navy; have they presumed to question the allegations of Mr. Sheridan? No; but whilst one part of the administration are holding up the marquis as a profound statesman, and the treasurer of the navy depicting him as a great state delinquent, the relatives and friends of lord Wellesley are calling upon me to be brief in my accusation; whilst the crimes committed in the Carnatic, and the charges of Mr. Francis and Mr. Sheridan are allowed to pass unnoticed, unrefuted, unattempted to be contradicted.—But, to return to the Knight of the Bath: does he not know, that marquis Wellesley is accused by his employers, the East-India Company, of conveying powers to the hon. general, of a despotic and reprehensible nature, and as improper, and contrary to law? And, acting under such orders, is the hon. general not aware that his doing so was illegal! The ignorance of the laws of his country is but a poor vindication of the deeds done in a civil capacity in India; deeds declare to be illegal, unjustifiable, and reprehensible,

935
nay, impeachable. The relatives of lord Wellesley will not, of course, listen much to what I recommend; but England expects decency from them at least, and that, until lord Wellesley is declared unimpeachable, by a vote of this house, the person at least who is so much implicated in certain of his proceedings, will not in future, by an ill-timed declaration of innocence, or by threats as contemptible as they are ridiculous, attempt to slander, sir, the person to whom he cannot impute any motives but those of a public nature, appearing as the public accuser of a man covered with crimes, and whom, if possible, I am determined to prosecute to conviction.—It is painful to revert to what passed upon a former occasion, but the words made use of by the right hon. secretary of state (Mr. Fox) cannot pass without observation; I can tell the right hon. secretary, that his words have only excited, in my breast, sentiments of sorrow upon his account; and having no wish to irritate, where it would be policy to conciliate, I beg leave to tell him that his threat of "peril" was as injudicious as it was unexpected. But, sir, were I to throw down the brief of the people of England, the house must proceed on the charge, and the proof I have brought before them; and it will be from no fear of the threat of the foreign secretary, if I give him and the house the repose be so much desires and implores.—It has been stated by some gentlemen, but by none so particularly and so pointedly, as by the right hon. the rescinder of the former vote of this house (Mr. Sheridan) for printing of the charge against lord Wellesley, that I had adopted a proceeding novel, unprecedented, extraordinary, and, I believe, he said, improper. Now, sir, I appeal to you and to the house, and request attention to the mode of proceeding. It was, I maintain, neither novel, or unprecedented; extraordinary or improper. It was constitutional, it was fair, it was consistent with former usages; it was the only course of proceeding that I was warranted in adopting, under the circumstances of the case; and had gentlemen been as ready to set me right as to take advantage of a trifling error of mine, (not being perfectly acquainted with the tactics of this house,) I should have been saved much trouble, and the house would have been spared the scene it witnessed last Tuesday. Rut I have escaped un urt; and perhaps others may hereafter (the accused nobleman I am certain will) have occasion to
936
lament the proceedings upon that occasion. —The shout of the noble lord under me (lord Temple) on that evening, in cordial cry with the right hon. the member of the board of controul (Mr. Hiley Addington), in consequence of a pause that will be long remembered, will, if I mistake not the character of the English nation, be turned, thouhg they may not confess it, to the grief and bitterest sorrow of both; at least, they will be taught not to shout, until the enemy have fled, until the battle is decided.— As to precedents, they are completely and decidedly in my favour: in the case of lord Denby, lord Coningsby, lord Arlington, the charges were laid upon the table, at the first proceeding in each of those cases, and papers moved for afterwards to support the facts. What, I ask, was there different in my mode of proceeding? But exclusive of precedents, I maintain that public rumour alone, is sufficient to entitle a member of this house to bring forward a charge of impeachment. Such is decidedly the opinion of Mr. Hatsell, and every other constitutional writer upon the subject. But I do not ask the house to take assertion as proof. I shall read Mr. Hatsell's opinion upon this subject, which is in the 104th page,—(here Mr. Paull read the extract from Hatsell, which was decidedly in support of his assertion). But, said he, the case of sir Elijah Impey is infinitely stronger, and precisely in point. After a speech of some length, the present lord Minto, without any previous proof, laid his charge upon the table against sir Elijah, and which was ordered to be printed for the use of the members. So much for precedent: and having put myself right in the opinion of the house upon this point, it is really a matter of indifference to me, personally, whether the charge is printed at present or not. I shall now, however, adduce the proof on which I maintain, according to the right hon. secretary, the right hon. rescinder, and of every friend of lord Wellesley's, that I am entitled to demand the printing of this paper as a matter of right, whether I have that right or not.—No person denied, that if any proof was before the house, (without any proof, except that contained in the charge, and the notoriety of the facts, I say I was entitled to the object I have in view this evening,) was entitled to the printing of the charge; but I have no doubt, I shall have another instance to add to the many proofs of the consistency and fairness of the defenders of lord Wellesley.—

937
I have no doubt that they will say, that the papers, on which I ground my claim to the printing of the charge, have been produced incidentally. To such persons I mean to give no reply; but to the honest and independent members of the house, I shall briefly anticipate such an assertion, which, by the bye, would be very unfair to make; for even had the papers appeared incidentally, which however they did not, I should have conceived myself entitled in perfect fairness to make use of such proofs, and if I felt inclined, to ground a new and specific criminal charge upon them. I ask the house to recollect, in what manner the proof was obtained which induced the house to adduce the additional article of Impeachment against lord Melville? They were obtained perfectly accidentally by the managers, and in a manner somewhat objectionable. The documents, however, contained in No. 8, of the India papers, have been produced upon my own motion, and for the express purpose of criminating the late governor-general. In the article of charge I have inserted various breaches of the law, the total and entire failure upon the part of the East-India Co., of the engagements made to the public when they obtained their charter. I have stated various disobedience of orders along with these violations of the law, complete proofs of all such allegations are contained in the papers now upon the table. I confess it was my intention, on these papers, to have made a motion for a select committee; but in an interview that I had with the right hon. the secretary of state, he stated various reasons to me against such a proceeding; the strongest however, was, that. he would oppose it. I had therefore no alternative, but dropping the cause of the public and of justice, or pursuing the course I have adopted. I shall not trouble the house with a detail of all the papers contained in No. 8; they however contain complete proof of eight of the allegations, and exhibit a scene of the grossest misrepresentations, and disregard of every principle of truth and honour; they exhibit another instance of what talent was reduced to, after iniquity, oppression, and injustice had become familiar to the humour of the marquis of Wellesley.—Mr. Paull went very much at large into the financial and political situation of India. When lord Wellesley took charge of the government in 1798, the debt he then stated to have been little more than 11,000,000 l.,
938
—the Commerce flourishing; and that the last act of lord Teignmouth's administration, added a permanent resource, by the treaty of Oude, to the company of 300,000 l. a year; that the whole interest of the debt was little more than 500,000 l.; that every thing was peace; that the princes were attached to our government; and no native of Hindostan had cause to complain of injustice; that no bullion had been sent to Bengal during the whole of sir John Shore's government; that during the government of lord Wellesley, he obtained supplies from England in specie to the amount of nearly 4,000,000 l; that during the same period he drew upon England for 3,800,000 l. that he unlawfully seized large sums of the money destined for China, in direct opposition to the orders of the court of directors; that by false representations he obtained from the super-cargoes at Canton, several large sums destined for commercial purposes; that the sums so obtained, at an enormous expence to the company, instead of applying them for the purposes to which he represented he was to appropriate them, Mr. Paull said they had been expended on the college, the body guard, the government house, for the shew and splendour, and for the actual expences of the governor-general himself. One paragraph from the papers he begged leave to read to the house, which would shew what credit was due to the assertions of the late governor-general, who, in the close of the year 1799, represented the finances as most flourishing, public credit higher than ever it was known in India before, and that in fact he would require no farther aid from England. The letter, Mr. Paull said, was dated Feb. 11, 1800, addressed to the super-cargoes at China; the paragraph was in these words: "Unless early relief be afforded to the finances of India by a large supply of bullion, the public credit will suffer; the investment in India for the present year must be reduced to a low scale, and I entertain the most serious apprehensions that I may not be able to provide the necessary means of exertion against the common enemy." In consequence of this representation he obtained from the super-cargoes 125,000 l. at an expence to the company of upwards of 12,000 l. and which, instead of retaining for the defence of India, he squandered in the shameful manner stated in the charge. Mr. Paull concluded a long speech by a picture of India when lord Wellesley was superseded by lord Corn-

939
wallis. Notwithstanding, said he, the bills thus drawn, the specie remitted, an the supplies obtained from China, in consequence of false and fraudulent representations, and in violation of law, the debt exceeded 31,000,000 l.; 5,000,000 l. more were to be provided for the next year; loans were open all over India; the treasury empty; and, in consequence of the profuse, extravagant, reprehensible, and illegal expenditure of the public money, lord Cornwallis was forced once more to seize upon the treasures destined for China.—So much for the finances. And as to the political situation of India, we were at war with Holkar; not certainly at peace with Scindia; a confederacy forming to drive us from India; and the universal estrangement of all descriptions of the natives—the consequence, said Mr. Paull, of the system of lord Wellesley; a system of iniquity, of oppression, and blood; adopted on his arrival, and pursued, undeviatingly, until, fortunately for mankind, the arrival of lord Cornwallis drove him from Asia.—Mr. Paull moved, that the charge be now printed;" which motion was seconded by Mr. Martin, the member for Tewkesbury.
Dr. Laurencesaid, that whatever might have been heretofore his opinion touching the propriety of printing the charges, before all the evidence in support of them was laid on the table, from what he had heard this night from the hon. gent. who had just sat down, he must second his motion, and support him if he persisted in it. At the same time he begged leave to submit it to his own discretion, whether it might not better answer his purpose, and less excite opposition, if he were to postpone hip motion for a few days, until the whole of the papers, in support of the charges, should he laid upon the table.
Mr. Paullsaid, it would be useless for him to postpone a motion now, which he should feel himself again under the necessity of pressing upon the house, in the course of a day or two.
The Marquis of Douglassaid, he lamented his not being in the house on the former discussion, when he thought the house had not very properly rescinded the order it had before made for the printing of the charge. It was true, that the charge rested at present upon little more than the assertion of an hon. member, who, though unsupported and unprotected, made no motion which the proceedings of the house did not tolerate; but at present it was no
940
more than a dead letter, which it was proper to revive or animate, by having the charges printed, in order to enable that house fairly to judge of it. When a member of that house, actuated by manly and honourable feelings, stepped forward in a public cause of the greatest importance to the Empire at large, and when that member was not only unsupported but discouraged, he felt himself impelled to assist in bringing this business to light. It would make a great impression on the public; and that house ought to consider what the consequence must be if they refused to entertain or consider this question. He had lately, he said, been led to enquire more than he did before, into the state of our affairs in India; and the result of his investigation was, that he found in the administration, many great and manifold evils, which, instead of assisting the finances of this country, must now become a burthen to it; and in fact, we were already advancing money as a loan to the company. It was therefore a considerable hardship to the people of England, to transmit its wealth to a foreign country, where it was not properly taken care of. He was of the opinion given some time since by an hon. gent. (Mr. Francis), that the members of that house would soon have to protect the finances of this country against the distresses of India. The alarming state of embarrassment to which the affairs of India were brought, shewed there was a latent gangrene somewhere, which ought to be probed, and the danger, if possible, obviated, which brought that quarter of the empire to the brink of ruin, before that ruin was complete, and should have plunged the country into fresh difficulties; for he considered India, which we were lately taught to view as a healthful and promising child of the parent state, as now exhausted by disease, clinging to the breast of the mother country, and ready to extract the last drop of her vital nutriment to prevent its own dissolution.
Mr. Sheridanobserved that the hon. gent., in renewing his charges that day, had expressed a hope that he should not meet, from certain individuals, a repetition of the harsh treatment he had experienced on a former night. He was at some loss to understand to what it was the hon. member made this allusion. He was sure that nothing of an improper nature would have been suffered to pass without the interposition of the chair. Who the in-

941
dividuals alluded to were, he could not tell; but, with respect to himself he had moved to discharge the order for printing the charges, not merely from any objection to their appearing in print, but because the printing of the charges could answer no purpose, unless they were accompanied by the evidence upon which they were to be supported. Certainly, in some of the papers since produced, there was much matter which appeared to support some of the hon. gent's charges against the noble marquis; for instance, the paper No. 8; and so far as that went, the objection to priming now was less strong than upon the former occasion. But the grand principle upon which he had first resisted the printing of the charges before the whole evidence was ready, was very little abated even yet. The hon. gent. had moved for 40 other documents not yet before the house; an honourable relative of the noble marquis had also moved for 40 other documents on the part of the defence, not yet forthcoming. These, whenever they were produced, would still remain to be printed. The hon. gent. had said, that if the India directors would do their duty, they could bring forward those papers in a day or two. He had, however, the assurance of persons very conversant in India business, that it would be impossible to produce them in the course of the present session. Now, in such a case, would it be proper that the charges should go forth in print unaccompanied-by the testimony upon which they Were avowedly founded? It was upon the ground of this defect that he had abstained from reading any part of the charges, or the documents hitherto produced, until he should have the whole before him, He should then have no objection to printing the charges, as then they would come fairly. forward for consideration.
Mr. Leeadverted to the four precedents alluded to by the hon. mover, and contended that they made against the order of his proceeding. In the case of lord Coningsbv, the evidence was previously brought and laid upon the table. Four years before the impeachment of Mr. Hastings, a committee was appointed, to enquire into his conduct, and made their report against him; after which, Mr. Burke came down to the house, and after the report was received, moved that it should be printed before he exhibited the articles of charge. In the third case, that of sir
942
Elijah Impey, the house had, two years before the artices were printed, voted an address to majesty, praying for his recall; and, lastly, in lord Melville's case, the house had before it fulland complete evidence in the several reports of the naval commissioners. He said he did not mean to give any opposition to the motion, though he thought it right to let the hon. gent. see that he was not supported by his precedents; but as he understood that there were some of the papers moved for, which could not possibly be produced in the course of the present session, the house, he thought, should pause before they gave public circulation to the charge.
Mr. Secretary Windhamdeclared his opinion to be decidedly in favour of printing the charge, and he could not help considering the treatment experienced by the hon. member who brought them forward, as extremely harsh: for instead of stretching out to him the hand of encouragement to prosecute enquiry in the cause of justice against a person high in power, he had met with nothing but discouragement; he had been thwarted and embarrassed in every step he had taken; nay, exposed almost to personal disrespect, sarcasm, and even ridicule. Such a conduct from any portion of the house towards any individual member, certainly was not very decorous, nor yet very politic, as it tended to discourage members from bringing forward impeachments, when, to their own minds and conviction, they conceived themselves warranted so to do, by acts of public delinquency. If this were a case where the accuser was considered and known to be a person of such character and description, or the charges themselves, primâ facie, so absurd, or improbable, as not to deserve being entertained for one moment; in that case, such discountenance would be justified. But no man had ventured to allege, much less to sheW, that this was the case in the present instance. The hon. gent. was,he said, but a very slight acquaintance of his, having but very recently returned from India; he was here, it was true, an individual little known, unconnected, and unsupported; but he was not the worse qualified to bring forward the charge in this case, for if he had been long absent from this country, he was long present, in that where the matter originated; and he founded his proceeding upon circumstances which, he alleged, had passed under his own observation. With regard to the argu-

943
ment of precedents stated by an hon. member, he would admit it was a good principle, upon which, in ,general, to act; but then, precedents should only operate in cases precisely similar. It was proper first, to read the charges themselves; but to read the evidence first, and the charges afterwards, would be to invert the regular order of proceeding. Besides, if members were to wait for the accumulation of such a mass of documents on both sides, before they commenced their own consideration, it was very possible that members would be discouraged from investigating such voluminous masses of matter. The right hon. secretary concluded by voting for the hon. gent.'s motion, though he certainly could have wished him to act by the temperate suggestion of his hon. and learned friend.
Mr. Secretary Foxsaid, he should vote for printing the charge. There was no great difference between himself and his rt.hon. friend (Mr. Windham) on the general principle. He agreed with him, that any member of the house had a right to present a charge. He would go farther, and allow that it was regular that a day should be appointed for its consideration. But now they were on a question, whether it should be printed without evidence, or scarcely any notice of evidence. He would not even there differ with his right hon. friend, as to the right, but at the same time when a member did this, without there being any necessity for it, he must say that his mode of proceeding was injudicious; and that he would have done much better, had he waited for the evidence. He might then say, 'there is the evidence, and you may compare the evidence with the charge,' and know how far it is well founded. Now it was possible, undoubtedly, that a member in calling for papers, might be told when his object was not exactly understood, "bring forward your charge, otherwise we will not grant you your papers." But, in this case, a variety of motions for papers had been made, none of which had been over-ruled, at least none that had been made by the hon. gent. himself. But he might have proceeded in another way, and have said, "there is the charge, and, to prove this, such and such papers are necessary." But the hon. gent. moved for a variety of papers first, and then brought forward a charge to which scarcely one of them applied. This conduct he certainly thought preposterous in the truest sense of
944
the word. If any of the ridicules and discouragements to which his right hon. friend had alluded, though he knew he did not refer to him particularly, were employed on this account, he, for his part, did not repent what had been done. The hon. gent. had that day, as usual, made a long speech, and certainly it would have required a mind of no ordinary sagacity to discover the connection between things so remote and apparently so little connected with the subject as those which he had introduced. He had, however, discovered some papers which bore on his charge. Now some said that these papers would be ready soon, and others affirmed that they could not be ready for some time. The present mode, however, was regular, though he thought that a different one would be far more eligible, But here again the hon. gent. demanded that the charge should be printed. This was a sort of language to which the house would not listen with great complacency, in a matter where its own convenience alone was to be considered. The demand then was indeed inconsistent with the principle on which papers were printed by the house. "Demand," he did not say "publish," though certainly it appeared as if this had been the hon. gent.'s object. But he hoped that the house would not be led to print papers upon any improper pretences. He would, however, vote for the printing of the charge, not because it was demanded, but because it would suit the convenience of the house. Now, one word as to the general way in which this business had been conducted. All the papers moved for had been granted, except one which had been called for by a noble friend of his (lord A. Hamilton). He wished that the house would arrange some mode by which all the various papers could be soon procured, that the house might be allowed some repose; for it was certainly unpleasant to have papers continually called for, and opinions given, and questions debated on every occasion. He wished to know when all the papers would be moved for. Mr. Burke, in the course of his proceedings in preparing the way for the charge against Mr. Hastings, carefully abstained from provoking debates on the merits, before the matter was fully before the house, and he wished that his conduct had been imitated in the present instance. As to the question now before the house, he agreed with his right hon friend that it was

945
of little consequence which way it was decided. As to any communication which the hon. gent. had with him, he had given bins his opinion, and on good grounds, that he was adopting a very injudicious mode of proceeding.
Mr. Paullexplained. He said, that out of 99 papers, for which he had moved, only 11 were produced; of these, only 3 were immediately relevant to his purpose. The Bhurtpore papers were not presented, nor any others that he moved for, except those relative to Oude.
Sir A. Welleseysaid, that the practice of parliament in such cases had already been shewn to be, that the evidence, should generally, if not always, precede the charges, and he saw no necessity for deviating from that rule on the present occasion; though he admitted, that every case should stand upon its own peculiar merits. The charge of the hon. gent. against his noble relation, was for squandering the money of the East-India Co. in unnecessary purposes of personal splendour; but the papers hitherto produced (those of Oude) applied to charges of which as yet he had given no notice. With regard to the money taken from the Canton treasury, his answer to it was, that this and other proceedings which were adverted to, had received the approbation of the court of directors, and that if the money were so disposed of, there was a proportionate increase of assets both a. home and abroad. As to the observation that he himself was implicated in some of the proceedings, his short reply was, that what he did in India, was in obedience to the orders .he had received; and for the manner of that obedience, and its immediate result, he was ready to answer, either to that house, or to any other tribunal the realm.
Dr. Laurenceadverted to the precedents which had been quoted in the course of the debate, particularly that of Mr. Hastings, none of which he conceived bore on the present case. He, declared, that his sense of the business would have been, for the hon. gent. who made the motion, to have withdrawn it, and waited until the evidence was before the house; but, as he had not thought proper to do that, he could not, as the business now stood, see an good reason against printing the charge.
Lord H. Pettywas inclined to think that it would have been much better if the hon. gent. who made the motion, had agreed to time first suggestion of the learned
946
gent. who seconded it, and not pressed it on the house. He also conceived that it was of no importance whatever, whether the charge was or was not now printed; but he thought it was always the object of the accuser, to bring forward his charge and his evidence at the same time; what evidence was sufficient, lay with him entirely to determine. In the present case, therefore, he considered the hon. mover as the best judge, whether the evidence on the table were sufficient, and he would therefore move for the printing of the paper,
Mr. Bathurstwas of opinion, that this motion ought not to. have been pressed, but he did not think because it was pressed, that therefore the house should agree to it. He did not pretend to say, that there were no cases in which charges might be produced before evidence, but he believed there were none except those with which, as they originated at home, the members were acquainted. The hon. gent. then said, that as the hon. mover would not agree to withdraw his motion, he thought a motion for the order of the day would be most applicable, and concluded by moving the previous question.
Mr. Corryseconded the motion, as, he said, it would put the parties into a relative situation, one with another. It would be no hardship to the hon. gent. who made the original motion, as the papers to substantiate the charge were not before the house; and it would appear as if the house of commons were resolved to support him throughout, if the paper were allowed to be printed.
Mr. W. Smithsaid, it appeared to him to be rather an irregular mode to print the charge before all the evidence was produced. The very circumstance of some of the evidence being already before the house, was a reason against it, and he therefore would vote against the original motion.
Mr. Johnstone,in part, coincided in opinion with the right hon. secretary of state, He, however, differed with him in many essential points; and, after arguing the question for some time, he declared that hi felt himself precluded altogether from giving any vote on the occasion.
Mr. Grantsaid, that if the question before the house were to be influenced by the expectation of having the papers which were moved for, laid upon the table in a short time, he thought it a duty to state his opinion that this expectation could not be fulfilled. The court of directors was always

947
eager to obey the orders of the house: there would be no intentional delay, but the papers moved for both by the hon. gent. (Mr. Paull) and the hon. general (sir A. Wellesley) were so voluminous, that it was not possible to get them prepared in a very short time. Mr. Grant said there would also be a necessity for calling for other papers, because the hon. gent. (Mr. Paull) had in his speech that night, and formerly, advanced positions respecting the causes of the company's debt, and particularly the alledged increase of it from supplying funds for the commerce of the company which he (Mr. Grant) had before combated, and which he should feel it to be his duty, if no one else would undertake it, fully to disprove by documents to be called for from the India house. In like manner, the hon. general appeared to have, in the list of papers moved for by him, included some which seemed to bear upon certain points in the conduct of the court of directors lately animadverted upon in that house; and it might be necessary to move for additional papers in order to bring those points fully before the house. He alluded particularly to a reference which had been made on a former night by an hon. gent. (Mr. W. Pole) to a proposed dispatch of the court of directors upon which that hon. gent. had been pleased to arraign them, although that dispatch was not before the house, although the house would not admit it to be produced, and although the hon. gent. acknowledged he had not read it.—With respect to the question now under consideration, Mr. Grant said, the inclination of his mind was that the charge should not be printed until it was accompanied by the documents on which the proof of it rested. Feeling this to be the fair and candid way of proceeding, he would avow his opinion, because having unfortunately had occasion to take rather a prominent part in many of these questions, and being likely to see it his duty to do so again, he found his only support, in the painful predicament in which so much collision with the feelings and opinions of others placed him, to be, in the consciousness of honestly following the dictates of his own mind.
Mr. Windham,in explanation, said that when he had before delivered his opinion, he conceived that the hon. gent. would have withdrawn his motion, but he now thought, that the motion lately made by his hon. friend, reconciled every thing, and he would support it.
Mr. Paull,desired to he informed, what mode of proceeding he should adopt, as he did not wish to persist against the sense of the house?
The Speakerwished to know the hon. gent.'s object before he gave any opinion, namely, whether the hon. gent. meant to withdraw his motion, or put it to the vote?
Mr. Paullexpressed his willingness to yield to the wishes of the house. Therefore, although contrary to his own opinion, he should, agreeably to what appeared to be the prevailing sentiment, consent to withdraw his motion.
Mr. Bathurstobserved that his motion was in the hands of the house. Upon which a division was called for; the gallery was ordered to be cleared, but after some conversation both motions were withdrawn.

PIG IRON DUTY BILL.
Lord H. Petty then moved, that this bill be read a second time.
Mr. Rosesaid, that from all the enquiries he had been able to make, and all the information he had collected on this subject, it appeared to him that this tax would be of great detriment to the general interests of the country. He contended that it would bear harder on the farming interest alone, than the duty on horses employed in agriculture, which had been proposed and abandoned during the last session. Besides which, its operation would extend to almost every species of manufacture carried on in this country.
Lord H. Pettysaid, that he was aware of a variety of objections to which the bill was liable; though he was decidedly of opinion that the inconveniences attending the tax had been considerably over-rated. He should wish, however, that full time should be allowed for the mature consideration of the tax in all its bearings and consequences; and on this account he would propose, that the bill be now read a 2d time, and that the house should enter more fully into its merits in the committee, on Friday next.
Sir J. Wrottesley,with a view to disencumber the debate on Friday, would ask now, whether any thing was proposed to be done to obviate the difficulty of giving a sufficient drawback to the manufacturers engaged in the export trade? A number of gentlemen in town, whose opinions deserved the attention of the house, thought the proposed drawback insufficient, as it seemed the utmost to be allowed, did not ex-

949
ceed 4l. per ton. The deductions on account of the ordnance and naval stores. would be considerable. The hon. baronet then proceeded to point out some omissions in the returns of the consumption of iron in the navy, made to the house from the navy board; and expressed a hope, that the noble lord would use his influence to procure every information for the house, connected with the subject.
Lord H. Pettystated the amount of deduction for iron used in the ordnance, and for the navy departments, to be altogether 51,460 l.; the drawback on foreign iron 13,770 l.; that on British iron 123,000 l.; making a total, with 5000 l. the estimated expence of the collection, of 193,000 l. to be deducted from the produce of the tax. The average of the drawback was 4l. a ton.
Mr. Wilberforceconsidered this tax as so inconsistent with the fundamental principles of taxation in its tendency and effects, that he trusted the noble lord would see reason to withdraw it. On this account he would leave it to the calm consideration of his own mind.
Mr.I H. Brownesaid, that he would have objected to the tax upon the first proposition of it, if it were not for his reluctance to oppose a plan of taxation founded generally upon the views and system of his late right hon. friend, the predecessor of the noble lord.
Lord A. Hamiltonexpressed his disapprobation of the tax, but reserved the avowal of the particular grounds of his opposition until the bill was committed.
Mr. Vansittartobserved, that, in the committee, many modifications of the bill could take place. An hon. baronet had mistaken the extent of the proposed drawback; 4l. per ton had been calculated upon as the average, and not as the highest allowance.
Mr. canningfelt reluctance in opposing any of the measures for procuring supplies in the present situation of the country. But the objections to the present tax were so numerous, and had been so strongly urged in various representations which he had received on the subject, that he would recommend it to the noble lord, to turn over in his own mind the possibility of substituting some other less objectionable tax in its room. He contended that it would raise half as much more from the agricultural interest alone, than had been proposed by the tax on horses employed in hus-
950
bandry which had been abandoned in the, last session, while all other classes of the community would be affected by it.
Mr. Felloweswas not apprehensive that the tax on iron would affect the farming interest in the proportion which had been mentioned; but he feared it would go a great way towards anni ilating the export trade, which, when once diverted from its channel, it would be extremely difficult to bring back again.
Mr. W. Smithsaid, it was not only in the iron used for shoeing horses that the farmer would seriously feel the tax, but in other uses, which made the consumption with him large.
Mr. Rosesaid, that a farmer who had four horses in his team, would pay at least 40 s. a year under the tax.
Mr. Babingtonthought that the general effect of the tax would be severe; but in checking the machinery of the country, he apprehended its operation would be particularly injurious.—The bill was then read a 2d time, and committed for Friday. The order of the day for the committee on the Property Tax bill on Friday was discharged, and the same-ordered for Monday next.

IMPEACHMENT OF LORD MELVILLE.
Lord Aucklandmoved, that this house do strictly prohibit and forbid any publication whatever of the Trial of lord Melville, during the continuance of the same; and that notices of such order be posted up on the doors of this house, and on the doors of Westminster Hall.
The Duke of Norfolkasked if there was any precedent for such a motion?
Lord Aucklandreplied in the negative; but argued that such a regulation was called for by reason and justice. He adverted to the instances of speeches, or proceedings, for 2 or 3 days successively, namely, on one side of the question, and in support of the charges, without the other party having an opportunity of urging a tittle in his defence against such allegations. He would put it to their lordships, and appeal to the whole house, whether it were fit that partial publications of the proceedings should go abroad in that manner?—The motion being read from the woolsack,
Lord Eldon,according to his conception of the motion, as he heard it read, thought such an order would go to the prohibition of the trial being published altogether, even after its conclusion; which, he seemed to think, could not be what was intended. He, however, highly approved of the principle upon which the prohibition proceeded, and he lamented the partial publication of trials, as frequently practised with respect to the courts below. He was sorry to say, that he was old enough to have
928
seen, in his time, much mischief result from that practice; and he particularly alluded to the case of the last impeachment. He therefore approved of what was now proposed; it would prohibit a practice which might afford grounds for a person to be deemed guilty, when, in point of fact, after hearing the whole of the case, their lordships' judgment might be such as to establish the innocence of the party.
Lord Hawkesburyexpressed his acquiscence in the principle laid down by his noble and learned friend; but as he conceived the effect of the motion would be to prohibit the publication of the trial altogether, he thought some words should be introduced therein, to limit the order to a prohibition during the continuance of the trial.
The Lord Chancellorexplained, that it might be owing to his mistake in reading the motion, that the noble lords were led into such a supposition. There were words in the motion to meet the idea adverted to, and he thought it absolutely necessary to the honour and justice of the house, that such a notice should be given.
The Duke of Norfolksaid a few further words on the occasion, and adverted to the impracticability of preventing that which should transpire on the trial from going forth.—The question was then put, and the motion agreed to by their lordships, and ordered accordingly.—The report of the committee appointed to regulate the ceremonial of the trial was then taken into farther consideration. The duke of Norfolk, lords Spencer and Hawkesbury, were the principal speakers, In respect to the delivery of tickets to the different peers of parliament for admission at Westminster-hall, it was finally agreed that the regulation adopted in former cases of impeachment should be adhered to.— On the motion of lord Eldon, that part of the report which regulated the manner of giving judgment, was postponed for consideration till a future day.