Sitting of 30 June 1808

CORPORAL PUNISHMENTS IN THE ARMY.
Sir F. Burdettrose, and shortly observed, that the object of his motion was, for the purpose of bringing regularly before the discussion of the house in the course of the next session, a matter which he conceived to be of the first importance, and
1116
which had already been discussed incidentally. He concluded, by moving, "That there be laid before the house, early in the next session of parliament, Regimental Returns of all Corporal Punishments sentenced and inflicted during the last ten years, ending on the 1st of Jan. 1808, in every regiment of Regulars, Militia, Garrisons, and Artillery; specifying the causes, the sentence, and the number of lashes given at one or more periods."
The Secretary at Warrose to give the, motion his decided negative, and he trusted that the house would coincide with him in the vote he should give. He would not enter into much argument upon the subject, as the lion, baronet had not prefaced his motion with many observations; but he would appeal to the house and to the hon. baronet himself, whether any good consequences were likely to result from such a motion, at this particular time? For his part, he was convinced, that it could produce no good, and might produce great evil. On this ground, he would have opposed the motion, even if the return moved for had been a simple paper, which was already in the hands of all the members. Although he had already given his opinion on the subject when it was discussed incidentally, yet he should now repeat, that there was nothing which history made more evident than that a body of men subjected to military discipline, and governed by a particular law, were much more to be depended on in the field than those who were not so disciplined. If this, then, were to be considered as a general truth, he saw no reason why, at the present moment, and with such an enemy as we have now to contend with, that the discipline which had so long subsisted in the British army should now be shaken. It appeared to him that great evil might be produced from this question being agitated among the common soldiers. He was perfectly aware of the competence of the house to discuss this or any other subject which should be brought before them relative to the army, as it was competent to them to address his majesty on all such subjects; but, at the same time, it would be for the discretion of the house, and also for the discretion of the individual member who brought forward such motions, to consider whether they could be productive of any good, and whether, on the other hand, they were not likely to produce much mischief.—No member rising to speak,
Sir Francis Burdettrose, in reply to what had fallen from the right hon. the Secretary at War. He was extremely surprised at the manner in which his motion had been received by that right hon. gentleman, as it appeared to him, that a matter of greater importance, or more peculiarly important in the present times, could not possibly be submitted to the consideration of the house. He thought they would do ill by the country, and that they would do ill by its gallant army, if they were to leave out of their consideration entirely the sufferings to which that army, and the individuals that composed it, were daily exposed. If this consideration was at all times due to the army, it was more, peculiarly due to it at a time when it comprised so considerable a portion of our population, and when, by the institution of the Local Militia, every man in England was affected by the military code of the country.—He did not think that considerations of that nature should be answered by old trite observations, of military discipline being a necessary thing, and of disciplined troops being better than those that were undisciplined. Such general observations were not of weight enough to be entitled to put a stop to all discussion upon the subject. As to the objection of the great difficulty in obtaining such returns, he could not but conceive that those returns could be easily procured from every regiment in the service. As to the great danger that there was supposed to be in parliament meddling at all with the discipline of the army, he was enabled, in support of his own opinion, to cite the authority of Mr. Justice Blackstone, who in speaking of the Mutiny Act, said, "That the Mutiny Act was an act hastily penned, and he wished that it should be, some time or another, submitted to the deliberate consideration of parliament." It was not, therefore, extraordinary that he should view the subject in the same light that Blackstone viewed it, or that he should think that this was a lime peculiarly proper for such a consideration. When the whole population of the country were becoming military, and perhaps ought to become military, at such a time it was peculiarly necessary that the military code should be made as congenial to the feelings of the nation as was consistent with the proper ends of military discipline. He could not see what objection there was to producing information upon the subject, as the house would have afterwards the power
1118
of determining, according to their discretion, upon the information so received. If the information was laid before the house, and the house, upon deliberate consideration, found that the system of corporal punishment could not be got rid of, it would at least be satisfactory to the public to know, that the subject had occupied the serious attention of the legislature. It might, perhaps, be found, that the system was at least capable of receiving a good deal of modification; and that it should not be left to the caprice, folly, or accidental disposition and character of mind of particular commanders, what punishment those under their command were to be subject to. It was well known in the army, that under one officer corporal punishments were seldom or never known in a regiment; but that when the same regiment passed under the command of another officer, they became frequent. It was in vain to say that the character of the English soldiers made the frequency of those punishments necessary; for it was well known, that some officers, much to their credit, preserved the discipline of their regiments, and increased their reputation, without often recurring to this mode of punishment; whereas there were other officers, under whom it was much practised, and it was not remarked that their regiments were much improved by it. He should not hesitate to name a particular regiment in illustration of his argument. The 15th Light Dragoons had formerly gained reputation for discipline at home, and for good conduct when abroad. It had, as he understood, been for nearly eight years under the command of an officer who was not fond of inflicting corporal punishments, and in the space of eight years there had been, as he understood, but six corporal punishments in the regiment, which was at that time remarkable for its discipline and good conduct. That regiment had, however, now got another commander (the duke of Cumberland); and while it was under his command, he was informed that there had been no less than 80 punishments in less than half that period; and he was told that the regiment was likely to be spoiled. He thought it was most evident that soldiers should not be left, in this respect, to the caprice or accidental character of the different individuals who should happen to command it. The right hon. secretary said, that discipline must be kept up in an army: this was a thing which every body

1119
knew; but other armies kept up their discipline without having recourse to the punishment of the lash. The enemy with whom we were contending, had also disciplined armies, although there were no such disgraceful punishments in his armies. He would not believe that there was any thing in the character of English soldiers which required a much greater severity of treatment than any other army, perhaps with the exception of the Russian army.
Lord Castlereaghwas surprised at the hon. baronet having conceived that this was a proper period to bring forward such a motion. He hardly knew how to argue against the hon. baronet, as their views upon almost every subject were so totally different, that there was scarcely a point of coincidence. He wondered, however, that if the hon. baronet felt the subject of so great importance, he should have slept over it until the session was just upon the close. If the returns could be made, and it appeared that punishments were frequent, that would not support the argument of the hon. baronet, as it would be a greater proof of the existence of offence than of the impropriety of the punishment. The motion of the hon. baronet, connected with the observations he had formerly made, did look like a settled and systematic intention to bring the military code of the country into disrepute. In the French code, to which he appeared to give so great a preference, the officers could, without any trial, inflict the punishment of death, upon any soldier whom he should conceive to have committed an offence that deserved it. When they, had such a power, corporal punishment might not be so necessary. If corporal punishment existed in our army, it was because by the English code no man's life or person could be touched or shaken without the decision of a competent tribunal. The hon. baronet had, however, found an opportunity to insinuate that punishments in the army depended on the caprice, folly, or passion of commanding officers, and to mention the name of an illustrious commander. He must have known, however, that no man could be punished in the army, but by the sentence of a court-martial, the members of which were upon their oaths. The house might therefore judge with what degree of liberality and candour it was that he drew his views, from what he had stated to have taken place in one particular regiment. He must also observe, that the regiments of
1120
cavalry were much fuller now than at the time the hon. baronet alluded to, and that on that account the punishments might be supposed to be more numerous. He anticipated the feelings of the house, and the disapprobation they would express to the motion. He conceived the statement was a most injurious misrepresentation of our military code. No soldiers excelled the English soldiers in their attachment to their king, and their fidelity to their country, or who testified it more, when their fidelity and attachment were put to the test. He was sure that the majority of that house, and the great mass of the country, would disapprove of interfering with the established discipline.
Sir George Warrenderwas of opinion, that the full rigour of the military code ought not to be applied to the local militia. But with respect to its application to the regular army he differed widely from the hon. baronet, as he did almost on everything he brought before the house. It was not only by the previous form of a court martial that the arbitrary infliction of punishment was guarded against, but by the inspection of the visiting general officers, who were to see the regimental returns of the courts martial, of the punishments that should have taken place, and of the degree and manner in which those punishments should have been executed; of all which particulars the commander in chief required particular reports to be made to him. The general officers were also instructed to inquire of the men, as they passed the companies, whether they had any grievance to complain of. With all these checks there could be no instance of wanton or capricious punishment. The use of the cane was entirely laid aside in consequence of the denunciation of his majesty's severe displeasure. He thought it necessary to state these facts, to prevent the public mind from receiving a false impression on a matter so important.
Lord Folkestonesupported the motion of the hon. baronet. He agreed entirely in the eulogium which was bestowed by a noble lord on the character of English soldiers; but he thought that very eulogium was an argument in favour of the motion, as it shewed that such men did not deserve to be subjected to more disgraceful or severe punishments, than were those in the other armies of the world. The noble lord, however, had advanced no reason against the motion of the hon. baronet,

1121
although he had made some comments upon his speech. If by the returns moved for, it should appear that those punishments were not very frequent, and that they were administered in a steady, even, course of justice, then the production of such a return would be the best answer that could be given to the speech of the worthy baronet. If, on the contrary, it appeared (as he believed no gentleman out of that house would deny), that the system of punishment was by no means uniform or regular, but was different in one regiment from another, and in the same regiment, when it changed its commander, he thought it was evident that that was not an equal or impartial code, and that the system ought to be reformed or modified. The object of the motion was to find out the manner in which this military code was exercised. It was well known that every regiment was subject, to the same military code, and yet, if this code in some regiments, or under some officers, should be found infinitely more severe than in others, it was necessary to guard those regiments, and the army at large, from the consequences of the caprice of individual officers.
Mr. Windhamdid not conceive that such return would enable the house to form a correct judgment on the subject. It appeared to him that the principal thing which was to protect the soldier from capricious punishment, was effected in this country by making a court-martial necessary before punishment could be inflicted. He thought that by the French code, the soldier was more exposed to capricious punishment, as he had not the benefit of a trial. He hoped that the evil would be corrected in a gradual manner; and he thought that it would be best effected by countenancing those officers who kept up the discipline of their regiments without making those punishments often necessary, and by discountenancing those who only preserved the discipline of their regiments by the frequency and severity of corporal punishments. He thought the feelings of the officers, and the fashion of the service, would do more to diminish these punishments, than could safely be done by the legislature.
Earl Templesaid, that his principal objection to the motion was, that it might at the present moment do harm, and that it could not do good. If the motion was agreed to at the close of the session, it would hold out hopes and expectations to
1122
the soldiers, which would probably be disappointed. He therefore thought it would do no good to turn the attention of the legislature to the subject; but that it might do a great deal of good, to have the attention of the different commanding officers directed to the consideration of the subject. In that point of view only it appeared to him that good could result from the agitation of this question. Perhaps the different commanding officers might, by consulting together upon the subject, find out other punishments that would be equally effectual in keeping up the discipline of those regiments, without being so obnoxious to the feelings of men in general. He did not conceive, however, that the motion of the hon. baronet had justly subjected him to any reproof, as it was notorious that the punishment of the lash was much less frequent in foreign armies than in ours.
Mr. Lockhartwas decidedly adverse to the production of such returns. They would be only giving to the house the groans of the sufferers, without giving the evidence upon which they received their sentences. Corporal punishment was not peculiar to the army, but might be inflicted by the sentence of the judges for various offences at the common law. A soldier had, in addition to the court-martial that tried him, the advantage of an appeal to the commander in chief, who might order a general court-martial, and he had actually known a case where a soldier had obtained a new trial upon such an appeal, and was acquitted.—The house then divided: For the motion 4; Against it 77.—Majority 73.

HYDE PARK.
Mr. Creeveyrose, in consequence of the notice he had given, for the purpose of bringing before the house the intended encroachments in Hyde Park. It would be unnecessary for him to endeavour to impress upon the house the great advantages which the population of this vast metropolis derived from having access to the three Parks. It was, therefore, a subject of considerable regret to him, to find there was a plan in contemplation for devoting a great part of Hyde Park to private edifices. It was a very ungracious thing in any officer to recommend to his majesty that certain parts of it should be granted out for such purposes. He would not deny that the king had the right of doing so; but when it was considered that within these few years the public had paid no less than 71,000 l. for

1123
the improvement of the Parks, he could not help thinking that they had a pretty good claim to the use of them at least. It was said that the proposed plan would extend only to eight houses, but if the buildings were once begun, he was convinced the system would go on. These eight houses would not be the last. When on a former evening he made use of the word favouritism he did not mean to imply that any political favouritism was shewn by the Crown Surveyor; but he certainly did mean to say, that an improper preference was likely to be given by that person, and that some individuals nearly connected with him were to obtain that preference. It was no excuse to say, that persons whose political opinions did not accord with those of that gentleman, were also to obtain grants of the same kind. The object of his motion was the production of the correspondence between Mr. Fordyce and the lords of the Treasury, for the purpose of procuring their consent to the leases which he was about to execute. Should the correspondence be granted to him, it was his intention to follow it up by an address to his majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to leave Hyde Park in its present state.
Mr. Hanbury Traceyseconded the motion. He censured the plan of curtailing Hyde Park; but if the measure was persevered in, he wished the chancellor of the exchequer would include him among those to whom lots were to be given.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerobserved, that no ground had been laid for the motion, and that it would ill become the house to interpose between his majesty and the exercise of one of his undoubted rights. It was to be presumed that on this occasion he would act with the same beneficence and conscientious regard to the interests and convenience of his subjects that had marked the whole of his reign. There was no reason to suppose his majesty would make any improper grants. The plan, in fact, had not yet been submitted to him. It was only a few days ago that it was laid before the Treasury. With what propriety, therefore, in this stage of the business, could the hon. member call upon the house to interfere? There was no intention to convert the Park into a town, and for any purposes of sordid gain to turn that which was now used for recreation into streets. Such a project would meet, and deservedly, with general reprobation. But he could not
1124
see upon what grounds that house could call upon his majesty to refrain from the moderate exercise of an undoubted right. As to favouritism, he would assure the hon. gent, it was not intended to give an undue preference to any person. The grants were to be the subject of fair and open competition; and they who might succeed in obtaining them, would find, that they occupied the most expensive houses, by far, in the metropolis. As he had before observed, no case had been made out,' and he must, therefore, oppose the motion.
Mr. Windhamcontended, that this was a subject, of all others, fit for the interposition of the house, and that this was precisely the moment when it should interpose. The plan, it appeared, was almost completely arranged, and if the house did not address his majesty now, they would have no other opportunity of doing so. By the time they next met, the houses probably would be half built, or, at least, so far advanced as to render it impossible to discontinue the plan. Against the plan he must enter his protest. He was not quite sure that his majesty possessed the right of disposing of the park in the way proposed. It would be a satisfaction to him to know how the crown and the public stood in that respect, and whether it had not given up the right which it was now intended to assert, in consequence of the payment from the Consolidated Fund. It was idle to suppose the plan would not go on if it were once begun, and that it would be limited to eight houses. These, houses would go on, co-operating with other houses, until it would be no longer a park. Indeed, it could scarcely be called so at present, for it was almost invested with houses. On one side there was Knightsbridge, grown into a considerable town; on another, Kensington. There was also a great town starting up on the northern side. Now, if in addition to these a number of houses should be erected, the power of vegetation would be completely destroyed. The park would no longer be that scene of health and recreation it formerly was. It was a saying of lord Chatham, that the parks were the lungs of London. He could devise no means more effectual for the destruction of these lungs than the proposed plan. The great increase of the metropolis might be attributed to the desire which every man felt to get as it were into the country; to go a little further towards it than his neighbour.

1125
He had heard of parks being decorated with grottos and temples, but here was a plan to decorate a park with houses; as if a citizen, who should leave Whitechapel on a Sunday evening to get a little fresh air, would feel much gratified when he arrived at Hyde-park to see nothing but houses, he would most probably think that he had seen enough of these in the course of his walk. Hyde park would not admit of being contracted, and he trusted that this plan of decorating it, by setting a few London houses in the midst of it, would be abandoned. He was glad of an opportunity of marking out these consequences. There were but few marks of royal splendour in the metropolis. Though he did not think so lowly of St. James's as others, yet still he must say, that if it did not look like a palace, it did not look like any thing else: certainly, not like a private house. That and the parks were the only signs that London was ever used as a royal residence. He protested therefore, against any project intended to convert these into a source of emolument. The inconvenience that would result from it would infinitely outweigh any advantage that would be derived from it. He was glad that this discussion had taken place. It would not be without its use, if it should prevent the execution of a plan which, to speak of its consequences in the mildest way, must at least produce very considerable dissatisfaction.
Mr. Sheridansaid, that agreeing as he did in every word which fell from his right hon. friend, he would only trouble the house with a few words. It was well known that he was extremely anxious to promote the improvement of the metropolis, and particularly of the city of Westminster; but in all the plans which he had supported and recommended in that view, it was a principle with him not to crib one inch from any of the parks. He could not conceive upon what grounds it was, that the surveyor of the crown lands supposed his majesty would give his concurrence to so ridiculous and unjust a plan, as that in contemplation. The park was already sufficiently encroached upon. Hamilton-place was both an encroachment and a nuisance. He had been to visit it that morning, and such a gibbet-like erection he never saw. It was all angles and projections. There was also that heavy lump, Bathurst House, which he could compare to nothing but a tub of brick. The plan, he understood, was to erect a
1126
number of houses parallel with Park-lane, but to build only opposite mean and low houses. But was not the mean house as dear to the proprietor, as the splendid mansions of lords Grosvenor and Petre were to those noblemen? Did he not, in fact, pay an additional price for the view as well as his wealthier neighbour, and why was he to be deprived of it? If this plan were carried into effect, the proprietors of these new houses would naturally throw their best rooms towards the park, and put their stables and other nuisances towards Park-lane. It would be a less objectionable plan to build on both sides of Rotten-row, that gentlemen might take their morning rides there, and have the advantage of being gazed at by the ladies in the balconies. If the right hon. gentleman would have the candour to assure the house that nothing further would be done in this business until the next session, he would recommend his hon. friend to withdraw his motion. Before he sat down, he would embrace the opportunity of apprising the house, that in the course of the next session it was his intention to bring forward the motion respecting the improvement of the metropolis, of which he had given notice two years ago, but which he afterwards dropped in consequence of some objections on the score of economy from the administration with which he was then connected.
Mr. Creeveyprofessed his willingness to withdraw his motion upon the assurance suggested by his right hon. friend.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that consistently with his duty, and the view he took of the subject, he would give no such assurance.
Mr. Huskissonsaid, that so far from the plan being completely arranged, he had only heard of it about a week ago.
A division then took place: Ayes 23;Noes 36.—Majority against the motion 13.

STAMP DUTIES BILL.
On the motion for the third reading of this bill,
The Earl of Suffolkrose to express his disapprobation of the principle of the bill, and of the hardships to which it would expose persons already labouring under a multiplicity of distresses. The noble earl instanced the case of some tenants of his own, upon whom he knew it would press with peculiar severity.
The Earl of Lauderdalewould not detain their lordships with a repetition of the objections to the principle of the bill, which he continued to consider as most iniquitous. He should then, however, in the most regular and public manner, enter his protest against it.
The Duke of Norfolkdid not rise to oppose the bill. Burdened as the country already was with a load of taxes, its situation was perhaps such as, under the present circumstances, to call for and justify some addition to that burden. His object in rising now was to avail himself of the privilege of a peer of parliament, and offer some advice to his majesty's ministers which the present posture of affairs suggested to his mind. He hoped it might not be deemed irregular or unparliamentary to offer that advice, and put a few questions to his majesty's government, at a moment when parliament was voting supplies for the current services of the year. In stating, however, his opinion to the house, it was by no means his wish to draw any answers from the ministers which they should not deem it perfectly proper and safe to make;

1107
indeed, he looked for no answers or observations at all respecting the subjects he should touch upon, unless his majesty's ministers thought it consistent with their duty and the present critical state of affairs, to enter into some explanation of them. The points to which he obviously alluded, and on which the public attention most anxiously hung, were the present situation of Spain and Sweden. The most wanton ambition, the foulest perfidy, the most cruel oppression, had lately displayed themselves in Spain, to a degree unparalleled, he believed, in any age or country. These excesses had fired the Spaniards with becoming indignation and resentment, and they were now endeavouring to resist the power which was preparing to overwhelm them. Such a spectacle must at all times be interesting to Englishmen; but it must be peculiarly so at the present moment. There was no man but must wish success to a generous people thus struggling in the glorious cause of the maintenance of their independence; no man, he was sure, could more cordially wish them success than he did, or would more willingly concur in the proper means of promoting and ensuring that success. But what were the best mode and the proper conditions by which Spain could be assisted? He did not pretend to know the particular circumstances in which Spain was placed, or the degree of hope that might be entertained of the success of these who were endeavouring to resist the sternest tyranny, instigated by the most desperate ambition, that ever was attempted to be exercised by any potentate over the independence of nations. Louis XIV. it was true, aspired to universal monarchy, but in a milder way, and with means less terrible. More formidable abilities, and more accumulated forces, were now to be contended against, and the issue was of the highest moment, not only to Spain, but to this country, to Europe, and the world. What part his majesty's ministers were prepared to act at so critical a juncture, he could not conjecture. They had at present in this country delegates from the brave people in Spain, who seemed determined to stem the torrent by which they were to be swept into servitude. From these, and of her sources, he hoped they might be enabled to collect the best information of the real state of that country, and of the probability of success with which so bold and hazardous a struggle might be attended. With such information before them, what would be their con-
1108
duct? This was the point which excited his anxiety. Would they hold out encouragement and assistance to the Spaniards who were now in arms against the invaders, before they saw any form of government established in the country with which they could communicate? Would they make common cause with the patriots of Spain, before they ascertained the principles upon which they were acting, and the ends which they were endeavouring to accomplish? He could not think it politic to embark in such a cause, without some previous knowledge of the designs of the Spanish patriots, without some more definite determination of the grounds upon which they were proceeding to act. He hoped ministers would, in the present case, take a lesson from past experience, and recollect the result of the interference of this country in La Vendee. He felt it his duty to throw out these hints, without expecting any detailed explanation of what might be the views and intentions of his majesty's government.—He now begged leave to trouble their lordships with a word or two about Sweden. The situation of that kingdom and of its sovereign was also highly interesting; respecting the issue of the struggle which that gallant prince was making against the common oppressor, he confessed he had his fears. Still, he should have our best assistance, as if our hopes of final success were most sanguine. Such an example was to be supported and upheld. But should that spirited sovereign be also doomed to yield, we should not be inattentive to the fate that was to befal his kingdom. If it was to be portioned out, should not this country look to the interests of Denmark, to the future views of the great northern power, and to the attempts that might still be made to assert the independance of the north of Europe? Our hostility to Denmark could not be very keen: we should even be disposed to make the amende honorable to her for what had past, and rather contemplate what reconciliation and future friendship might effect, than what might gratify present hostility. He should trouble their lordships no further, but only hope, that in expressing these his sentiments on the present occasion, he had not been guilty of any irregularity.
Lord Hawkesburygave full credit to the candid and circumspect manner in which, the noble duke had delivered his opinions upon points of such delicacy. The noble duke was perfectly regular in the mode he

1109
took of delivering them, for when supplies were to be granted to his majesty, it was doubtless open to every noble lord to advise how those grants ought to be applied. In adverting to the points to which the noble duke had more particularly directed the attention of the house, their lordships must be sensible that his observations must be very general, and that owing to the very peculiar and delicate nature of the subject, he could not at present enter into any detailed explanations. With respect to Spain, the people of that country had manifested a spirit and determination to resist the attempts of their invaders, which would have done honour to the most glorious periods of their history, and which perhaps were not to be expected under the pressure of such formidable difficulties. Such a scene, every man in that house, every man in the country, must hail with the liveliest satisfaction; and what every generous heart must wish should be done in support of so glorious a cause, his majesty's ministers would feel it their duty to do. With regard to what information they had received of the designs or the hopes of those brave and resolute men, who, in defence of their country's independance, were exposing themselves to every thing which a powerful and sanguinary tyrant could devise, and indict, it could not be expected he should now unfold it. His majesty's ministers were fully sensible of the extreme importance of this event; and he trusted they would be found to have acted accordingly.—The situation of Sweden was certainly the next in interest and importance, and towards the monarch of that kingdom, whose gallant exertions so justly claimed our warmest wishes and admiration, the conduct of his majesty's ministers would also, he trusted, appear to be without reproach. When the time came freely to unfold the principles and the views which had guided that conduct, whenever that moment arrived, he should not shrink from that inquiry; but on the contrary, be most forward and eager to court it. He hoped, that under circumstances like the present, he should not be expected to enter into any details, but be allowed to expect that their lordships might be assured that his majesty's government would neglect nothing which the nature of the circumstances, both of this and of other countries, might suggest and require.
Lord Hollandstill retained his objections to the bill, on which, however, he should
1110
not now again dwell, but rather follow the example of his noble friend near him, and shortly express his opinion of the present aspect of affairs. What was the extent of the means of the Spanish patriots, or what their future views respecting a change in their government, he did not pretend to be accurately informed of. Of the spirit that actuated them he had no doubt; and from the nature of the country, and the resources which that spirit would supply, he willingly took the most auspicious omens. It held out a prospect of things which authorized the best hopes; and he anxiously expected it would be improved and taken advantage of. Much would depend upon the spirit and the views with which the government of this country would now act towards Spain. His advice was, that their spirit should be most liberal, their views most explicit, their objects most distinct, and most plainly understood. If they attempted at all to assist the efforts of Spain to resist her invaders, they should broadly explain, not only what they intended to do, but also what they did not intend to do. Above all, they should convince the Spaniards, that in assisting them we had no private interests to promote, no selfish objects to attain, no favourite forms of government to prescribe, no commercial advantage to require, no exclusive partialities to insist on; that we disinterestedly assisted Spain to achieve what the Spanish people were hazarding every thing to accomplish; that we were consequently willing to guarantee the integrity of the Spanish empire, and to negotiate with any form of government which the Spanish people were disposed to adopt, or with any family which they might choose to call to the throne, if they decided on a monarchical form, whether limited or unlimited. Not a moment should be lost in laying down agreements of that nature. The time for acting was the present moment, and his majesty's ministers would be seriously responsible, if, for any petty considerations, such as those he had alluded to, the opportunity should be lost. He should again repeat, that the ground of co-operation and assistance between the two countries, should be broad, liberal, and thoroughly understood on both sides.
The Duke of Norfolkcould by no means assent to a principle laid down by his noble friend; he meant the guaranteeing the integrity of the Spanish empire. He considered the Spanish possessions in South.

1111
America as lost from the present moment, and severed for ever from the mother country. It was, therefore, for the government of this country, a commercial and maritime nation, to watch the fall of the Spanish colonies. He could not otherwise look with security and satisfaction to the British interests in that quarter.—The bill was then read a third time.

HYDE PARK.
Earl Grosvenorrose to call the attention of the house to certain rumours that had gone abroad, of an intention to erect a number of buildings, so as to obstruct the view of the park, which contributed so much to the pleasure and the health of the inhabitants of the metropolis, while it would materially injure the property of several individuals. He was at a loss what mode to adopt, in order to bring the matter under their lordships' consideration; but as it regarded the welfare of the public, he must think there was some mode or other of submitting it to the consideration of parliament.
The Lord Chancellorand the earl of Lauderdale insisted that it was highly unparliamentary to interfere in the private concerns of the crown. The duke of Norfolk observed, that if the noble lord should hereafter contrive to bring the question before the house, he would pledge himself to prove that the public were more interested in the property of the crown than in the property of any individuals.

CURATES' RESIDENCE BILL.
Upon the order of the day for the third reading of this bill,
The Earl of Buckinghamshirerenewed his objections to the bill at some length.
Lord Harrowbysupported the bill upon the same grounds he had advanced upon a former debate.
The Lord Chancellorexpressed himself as desirous as any man could be to provide amply for every degree of the clergy, so as to enable them to maintain the respectability and dignity of their sacred character; but he was much afraid this bill would not answer the end which it proposed. He clearly foresaw it would be productive of numerous vexations, which, instead of promoting the interests of religion, would rather tend to injure them. When the Residence bill passed that house, it had been proposed by a short clause, to make a provision for curates; but that clause had been rejected, and he was perhaps as much to blame as any other person for the failure of that clause. Viewing, however, the present bill in the light he
1112
did, he could not give it his support; but as his objections were principally grounded on what he conceived of its effects, as a lawyer, he would wish the reverend bench would give their opinions on it, which could not fail to have great weight with the house.
The Bishop of Rochester, in consequence of this appeal, rose and said, that the diocese over which he presided was so small, as not to furnish a sufficient number of instances by which any criterion for judgment could be established. He could, however, assure their lordships, that this was a measure to which he had paid great attention, with a view of extending all the relief, comfort, and convenience possible to those meritorious and active labourers in the vineyard for whom provision was intended by the present measure; he regretted, however, that the bill in its present form was completely inadequate to accomplish the object which their lordships had in view, and, above all, that it could not have that immediate and beneficial effect expected by the liberal and humane right reverend prelate, who chiefly supported it. Their lordships must be aware that nothing could tend so effectually to the support and maintenance of the established religion as union amongst its clergy. This was an object so desirable, that every well wisher of the church must feel strongly inclined to encourage and support it; but surely the proper line to be followed was not that which the clauses of this bill went to introduce, under the sanction of the legislature. The curate and the rector would be set at variance in the first instance, and then their superiors were to be involved in the contest by the power of appeal; so that from beginning to end there would be nothing but one scene of confusion, distrust, and jealousy. He certainly was as liberally disposed as any man towards the inferior classes of the clergy, but until some effectual plan should be introduced for affording them complete relief, he was not inclined to disturb the present order of things.
The Bishops of Hereford and Carlislecoincided with the right reverend prelate in his view of the subject.
The Bishop of Londonregretted the necessity which he felt of dissenting from the right rev. prelates who had just delivered their opinions; but, painful as it was for him to be in that situation, he still felt it incumbent on him to give his feeble support to this bill, because he was convinced

1113
that it would promote the interests of religion, and give additional security to the established church.
Lord Hawkesburysupported the bill, and said, that the right hon. and learned gent. who brought in the bill for the residence of the clergy, had expressly declared that a better provision should be made for the curates, by a subsequent measure, and under that impression he had supported that bill. When that bill was brought into the house of lords, a clause to make a better provision for curates was then proposed, and the noble and learned lord was one of those who particularly objected to it; so that he thought the present bill ought to pass, in order that a proper provision might be made for so large and deserving a body of the clergy as the curates.
The Bishop of Londonbore testimony to what had been urged by lord Hawkesbury by saying, that he had himself, when the Residence bill was before the house, proposed the clause in favour of the curates which had been alluded to; and he recollected, that the noble and learned lord had then particularly objected to it, on the ground that it should be the object of a separate bill. It had now been introduced in a separate bill, and he thought that bill should pass, for if it did not, he was afraid this would be the last time it would be attempted.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that thus called on, he must beg leave to say a few words. He acknowledged he had opposed the clause alluded to, and which had been brought in by the rev. prelate who spoke last, and he had already mentioned it this evening, and taken blame to himself on that account. He then very much wished the Residence bill should pass, and he and other noble lords who thought with him, were apprehensive that if that clause was tacked to it, the bill would be lost. He owned they had been mistaken, but that was the real cause of their objection. He observed his noble friend (lord Hawkesbury) smiled at what he said, but if he meant it in doubt of what he said, he would not bear it; for he had already expressly mentioned the circumstance before either the noble lord or the rev. prelate had alluded to the clause in question. The noble lord had said, that a right hon. and learned gent, who brought in the Residence bill, had pledged himself that a separate bill should be brought in for the better provision of curates. If any man could alter his sentiments on the present bill, it would
1114
be that right hon. and learned gent.; but he believed, he neither attended the discussions on, nor voted for the present bill; but not even the high respect and affection he entertained for him could prevail on him, to countenance a measure, which, in his conscience, he believed to be so pregnant with vexatious and mischievous effects.
The Archbishop of Canterburysaid that he was perfectly satisfied with the principle of the bill, but there were some of the clauses which he thought would be attended with injurious effects, and would introduce vexation and mischief; he should therefore vote that the bill be rejected.
The question being called for, the Bill was rejected without a division.

MAYNOOTH COLLEGE
On the question that the Appropriation act be read a third time,
Lord Hollandobjected to it on the ground he had done yesterday, relative to the alteration in the grant to Maynooth College.
Lord Hawkesbury, for the reasons he had before assigned, defended the alteration.
The Duke of Bedfordcondemned the alteration in the grant.
The Earl of Lauderdaletermed it a narrow-minded, parsimonious saving; and was sorry to find, that after ministers had expressed their wishes that all terms of asperity against the Catholics should be avoided, as well as every thing that might tend to irritation among them, they should have coupled two such transactions, as the sending back to Ireland, loaded with honours, a man, who had in a most illiberal manner always shewn himself a bitter enemy of the Catholics, and this paltry saving of 3,500 l. previously granted them for the better educating, at home, priests to superintend the religion of the great mass of the people; which, taken together, could not fail, in his opinion, to cause the greatest irritation.—The Bill was then read a third time.

PHOTEST AGAINST THE SUGAR DISTILLATION BILL.
On the third reading of this Bill, the following Protest was entered upon the Journals of their lordships: viz.
"Dissentient, 1st. Because, when we consider that the price of wheat was not higher than 72 s. per quarter, nor the price of barley more than 40 s. on the 7th of May, about which time it was first proposed to stop the distilleries, under the pretended notion of an approaching scarcity, and that the price of wheat was 75 s. 6d. and of barley Ms. 9d. on the 1st

1115
of Jan. 1802, at which time the prohibition, imposed in Dec. 1801, was done away by the legislature; it is obvious that this measure proceeds upon grounds perfectly different from those prohibitions which were enforced in the 35th, 36th, and 41st years of his majesty's reign.—Because, as we learn from the Report of the Committee, communicated to this house by the house of commons, that this measure was recommended 'with a view to apply as speedy a relief as possible to the case of the West India planters,' and that nothing in the evidence before them could have induced them to propose a measure so hurtful; independent of that consideration, we feel it our duty to protest against a principle so novel and dangerous as that of depriving the agriculturist of the benefit he derives from the demand created by the distilleries, for the sole purpose of a temporary relief to the distresses of any other classes of the community.—Because we see great reason to reprobate, in the strongest terms, that principle of commercial legislation, now for the first time adopted, which sanctions the temporary relief of those who have embarked their capital in one branch of industry, by imposing hardships on those whose capital is engaged in promoting the national prosperity through the means of another branch of industry.—It appears to us, that, if the price of cotton goods were at any time reduced so low, from the abundance of the stock in hand, that they were sold at a loss to the manufacturers, it would be a system new and injurious to prohibit, on that account, certain classes of the community from wearing woollen cloth. Yet it is upon this principle that the industry of the farmer, whose exertions are generally acknowledged to be the most beneficial to the community, is now to be depressed, for the purpose of affording an uncertain, and, at best, a temporary relief to the West India planter.
LAUDERDALE,
SUFFOLK AND BERKS,
SELKIRK."