Sitting of 1 March 1814

Preamble
In consequence of the great accumulation of private business, an unprecedented number of private Bills were brought in, and read a first time

SIR WILLIAM GARROW.
Mr. Lushington having moved, that the Speaker should issue his warrant to the clerk of the crown
330
to make out a new writ for the election of a burgess for the borough of Eye, in the room of sir William Garrow, who, since his election, had accepted the office of Chief Justice of Chester;
Sir Samuel Romillyobserved that the appointment which had occasioned the necessity for the motion just made by the hon. gentleman appeared to him to be so objectionable in its nature, that he should not consider himself as having properly discharged his parliamentary duty, unless he called the attention of the House for a few moments to the subject. It was not his intention to make any motion respecting it; he had not heard that such was the intention of any other hon. member. The present, therefore, was the only opportunity which he could ever have to make the observations that seemed to him to be so necessary. He understood that his Majesty's Attorney General, who had recently accepted the high judicial office described in the hon. gentleman's motion, had not resigned the office of Attorney General, and did not mean to resign it; but that it was his intention to hold the two offices together. To him (sir S. R.) it appeared that the two offices were wholly incompatible. To appoint a gentleman holding a lucrative office at the sole pleasure of the crown (and removable from that office the very moment that he might give dissatisfaction to the crown) to a high judicial situation, was in his opinion extremely inconsistent with that independence of the judicial character which it was so important to preserve inviolate. It could not be out of the knowledge or the recollection of most of the honourable persons who heard him, that early in his Majesty's reign, and on a very memorable occasion, his Majesty was pleased to state to parliament, that it appeared to him that the independence of the judges was essential to the impartial administration of justice, to the preservation of the liberty of the subject, and to the maintenance of the honour of the crown. He could not think that these sacred considerations were attended to in the appointment of a gentleman to a high judicial office, who, as he had before observed, held at the same time another office, very lucrative, in its nature, and from which he was removable at the pleasure of the crown at any moment at which the crown might think fit so to remove him. Besides, it was evident that to place as judge over the subject an attorney General,

331
whose duty it was to assert and maintain the rights of the crown against the subject, was not the way to insure the equal administration of justice. He trusted, that in making these observations, he should not be understood as intending any thing personal or any thing disrespectful to the learned gentleman in question, who had merely done as others had done before him. An individual who stood in the high situation of his Majesty's Attorney General, had a right to expect, and had a right that the public should expect for him, that when any high judicial situation became vacant, he should be vested with the judicial functions. But then he ought no longer to retain his office of Attorney General. He knew that there was a particular Attorney General for Chester as well as an Attorney General for the King; and that in many, perhaps in most, cases, prosecutions might be conducted in the court of Chester by the former, without any previous interference by the latter. But this was not always the case. For instance, the recent criminal prosecutions for riot in that part of the country were directed by his Majesty's Attorney General, who assisted at the consultations of his Majesty's government, the object of which was to ascertain the best mode of quelling the disturbances. Should such occurrences again take place under the existing circumstances, persons would be tried by an individual who had advised and directed their prosecution! It was undoubtedly true, that these two offices had at former periods been held by the same individual. Lord Kenyon, lord Alvanley, and other persons whose memory he highly respected, had so held them. But to him did the appointment seem so inconsistent with pure notions of the independence of the judicial character, which ought not to be exposed to be affected either by the hope of royal favour or by the fear of royal resentment, that no example, even had sir Matthew Hale, or lord Somers himself, afforded it, could in his opinion sanction such a measure. It was a great misfortune, that the instances to which he had just alluded, in which the two offices were held by one individual, had been allowed to pass without comment. Impossible as it was to justify the appointment, it was essential that such silence should not again be observed and particularly in that House; one of the peculiar duties of which was, vigilantly to watch over the impartial ad-
332
ministration of justice. What would be said by the country, if one of the twelve judges was to accept an office inconsistent with the proper discharge of his judicial functions, and from which he was removable at his Majesty's pleasure? What then could be said of an individual who held the two incompatible offices of Judge and Attorney General; the emoluments of the latter office being four or five times greater than those of the former, and from which latter office he was removable at the pleasure of the crown. Could such a person be considered as an independent judge? The House must be aware, that the office of chief justice of Chester was a very high one, being next in importance to those of the twelve judges; the chief justice of Chester having always to try an extraordinary number both of criminal and of civil cases. He had felt it to be his duty to throw out these observations; but be repeated, that it was not his intention to make any motion on the subject.
The motion was then agreed to.
On the motion of Mr. Ponsonby, a new writ was ordered to be issued for the county of Kildare, in the room of lord Henry Fitzgerald, who had accepted the office of steward of East Hundred.

THE PRINCE REGENT DESIRES THE HOUSE TO ADJOURN.
On the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Committee of Supply was postponed from tomorrow until Wednesday the 23d instant.
On the Chancellor of the Exchequer's making a similar motion, with respect to the Committee of Ways and Means;
Mr. Tierneyexpressed his surprise that the right hon. gentleman had abstained from assigning any reasons for these propositions.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, the reason, which induced him to wish for the postponement of the committees was that, in consequence of the existing state of public affairs, he had a communication to make to the House from his royal highness the Prince Regent, which communication he would make; namely. "That, it being the pleasure of his royal highness the Prince Regent, in the name and on the behalf of his Majesty, that the parliament should be adjourned until Monday the 21st day of this instant March, his Royal Highness desires that this House, will adjourn itself until Monday the 21st

333
day of this instant March." In consonance to this intimation, he would move, that at its rising the House should adjourn to Monday the 2lst instant.
Mr. Whitbreadobserved, that although every one had anticipated the communication which had just been announced by the right hon. gentleman, yet it was certainly surprising that the right hon. gentleman had not preferred making the communication the preliminary step to the postponement of the committees, instead of making the postponement of the committees the preliminary step to the communication. If he were not aware, that such was the usual style of a communication of that nature—namely, that it was his Majesty's 'pleasure' the House should adjourn, he confessed that he should think it rather an ungracious mode of expression. It was certainly, however, justified by the precedents on the Journals. He did not rise by any means to oppose the adjournment; to which, on the contrary, he should assent with the same readiness as he did to the last proposition of that nature. Nor would he express either disappointment, or hope, or fear, with respect to the events that had taken place since their last meeting, or that might be taking place at that moment. It was his wish cautiously to abstain from any observations on the subject; reserving himself until the period when that information should be afforded, to which he, the House, and the country, looked with confident expectation. But although he had no hesitation in voting for an adjournment, and for an acquiescence in the pleasure of his royal highness the Prince Regent, yet he owned that he entertained some apprehensions lest the present proceedings should be drawn into a pernicious precedent. He was not without his fears, that when the circumstances of the times should not be well recollected, posterity might accuse those who consented to the present proposition, of an abandonment of their duty to their constituents.—He was aware, that in 1799 an adjournment of a much longer duration even than that, the termination of which had this day assembled the House, had been proposed, and without difficulty acceded to; but that was at a period of the session at which the public business did not press so heavily as it had pressed during the late recess, and would necessarily press during that which was about to take place. Therefore, although he did not regret having voted for the last ad-
334
journment —although he did not repent having placed the confidence which he on that occasion placed the confidence which he on that occasion placed in his Majesty's government—although he was not disposed to cavil at the adjournment now proposed, yet he did wish to guard the proceeding from being converted into a dangerous precedent. He wished to have some record on the Journals of the House, of the grounds on which parliament had been induced to take such a step. In the words which he had committed to paper for this purpose, he hoped he had so entirely abstained from expressing an opinion, or any thing like an opinion, or an anticipation, with respect to public affairs, that he really entertained a confident expectation that the right hon. gentleman opposite would not object to their adoption. He would, therefore, move as an Amendment to the right hon. gentleman's motion, to leave out all the words after the word 'that,' for the purpose of inserting the following:—
"An humble Address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, to express to his Royal Highness the grateful acknowledgments of this House for the communication which his Royal Highness has been pleased to send to this House, in the name and on the behalf of his Majesty.
"To assure his Royal Highness, that notwithstanding the recent adjournment of this House, at a season when so many matters of the gravest importance pressed themselves upon its consideration, and for a period of very unusual length, this House will cheerfully comply with the pleasure of his Royal Highness, signified by the Chancellor of the exchequer, and adjourn itself to the 21st day of March instant; trusting that the unexampled state of public affairs upon the continent of Europe will afford a justification of their conduct to their constituents and to posterity, prevent its being drawn into pernicious precedent, and preclude the possibility of its being attributed to inattention to the great concerns which call for the increased vigilance and activity of the House of Commons, or any dereliction of its sacred duties."
The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in reply, defended, on the ground of precedents, the propriety of his having moved for the postponement of the committees before the made the communication to the House from the Prince Regent; but the right hon. gentleman spoke in a tone of voice

335
which was at times so nearly inaudible, that we were utterly unable to follow him, although he seemed to be arguing that the communication must, of necessity, be the last step; as respect to the crown would of course induce the House, without entering into any further business, to adjourn immediately on the intimation of the royal pleasure. He proceeded to say, that he could by no means consent to the amendment proposed by the hon. gentleman. The House would observe, that by the present mode of proceeding the suspension of the functions of parliament was left in the hands of parliament itself. If, however, by adopting such a proposition as that made by the hon. gentleman, any jealousy were evinced by the House, then, under similar circumstances, the crown would be put to the necessity of preferring the more inconvenient form of prorogation, to that of simply recommending an adjournment. The present was a proceeding sanctioned by the practice of all former periods. In very few instances had such a recommendation from the crown (the House resting on the responsibility of ministers) been even made the subject of debate. In one case, during the last war, the question of adjournment in similar circumstances had unquestionably been brought to a division—but what were the numbers? On the one side the tellers, on the other the whole body of the House! With respect to the last subject alluded to by the hon. gentleman, he would only say, that when the proper time should arrive, his Majesty's government would be ready to give every explanation that might be necessary to elucidate the discussion which the hon. gentleman anticipated.
Lord Archibald Hamilton, when he considered the advanced period of the session, and the length of the adjournment which had already taken place, felt himself compelled to resist the motion of the right hon. gentleman. He would ask the House, whether, if they could have foreseen, when they agreed to the late adjournment, that at the end of two months a still farther delay would be asked, they would have consented so readily as they then did? He wished to throw no embarrassment in the way of his Majesty's ministers; but he really could not see in what way the sitting of the House would embarrass them. The quantity of papers exhibited that day in the House was a strong reason for opposing the adjournment.
Mr. Ponsonbysaid, that no man could
336
feel more forcibly than himself the inconvenience to the public with which an adjournment would at present be attended; but every man must also feel the very important and delicate situation of affairs at this crisis; and when his Majesty's ministers, on their responsibility, came forward to the House and asked an adjournment for three weeks, he felt himself unable to resist the application. He could not conjecture what the affairs were which rendered such a measure necessary; but when the time arrived, at which a disclosure should be made to the House, he would then be prepared to enter on the consideration of them. He should feel a difficulty, if his hon. friend pressed his amendment, of supporting it; for he knew no instance in which the House, when it agreed to any measure like the present on the recommendation of the crown, had entered a reason for that compliance on their Journals; as the House had always considered the recommendation as a sufficient reason for its compliance. To act otherwise, would be to bring on a premature discussion of that which it was the object of the measure to avoid bringing under discussion. He would therefore confide entirely, in this instance, to ministers, on that constitutional responsibility which attached to their situations, and which at no time could they be more imperiously called on to exercise.
The motion for adjournment was then put and agreed to.

FIRE AT THE CUSTOM-HOUSE.
The Lord Chancellorstated, that in consequence of the burning of the Custom-house, application had been made to him for liberty to inspect the papers in the custody of the clerk of parliament which had been at any time presented from the Custom-house. Sitting on the woolsack, he thought it most becoming in him to mention the matter to their lordships; and he now moved, that Mr. Irving, the inspector general of the imports and exports, should have leave to examine the papers which had been at any time presented to that House from the Custom-house.—Ordered accordingly.

MESSAGE FROM THE REGENT, RECOMMENDING A FURTHER ADJOURNMENT.
The Earl of Liverpoolstated that he had a Message from the Prince Regent, acting in the name and on the behalf of his Majesty, recommending it to the House, under the existing circumstances, further to adjourn itself to the 21st of the present month (March). Having read the message, as above, he moved, that the House do accordingly adjourn till Monday the 21st instant.
The Marquis of Lansdownedid not oppose the motion; nor could he feel himself justified in giving it any decided opposition, after the manner in which it had been recommended by message from the Prince Regent; stating, at the same time, however, that, notwithstanding the manner in which the motion was recommended, he considered it as perfectly competent to himself, or any other peer, to oppose the motion of adjournment, if he thought proper. But any reluctance that he felt in concurring in this motion, and he certainly did feel some reluctance, arose not from any want of respect to the quarter from whence the recommendation came, nor from any want of confidence in his Majesty's ministers, or their efforts for the attainment of the great object, with, a view to which this adjournment was proposed; nor from any wish whatever to throw any obstacles in their way in the prosecution of that great object: on the contrary, if he imagined, or had the slightest idea, that the sitting of parliament would, in the smallest degree, interfere with them in this respect, or withdraw their attention or time, in the least from this important object, he should be the first not only to concur in, but to urge the propriety of agreeing to the noble earl's motion. His reluctance arose solely from a view of the state of public business at this moment, and also of much important private business. Many matters, which ought this session to meet with the serious attention of their lordships, would now be postponed to a very late period, if they could at all be brought under consideration. There was no disposition on that side (opposition side) of the House to give any interruption to ministers, in regard to any negociations that might be going on; and no such interruption would be given. Feeling no disposition on his own part, then to give any interruption to ministers in the object which at this time must particularly en-

325
gage their attention, he could not help regretting, that they had thought it necessary to come down to the House with a message of this nature, considering the late period to which the business of the session had been already postponed, and when so much important business remained to be disposed of; for be did not hold it as a doctrine, that because one great and important branch of public business could not be proceeded with, parliament was therefore to adjourn, and suspend the prosecution of all other business which might come before it. He saw no reason why the domestic business should stand still altogether, merely because any proceeding, with a view to our foreign relations, was for the present interrupted. Their lordships were, no doubt, aware, that a great quantity of private and other business stood for discussion, which parliament was pledged to take into its most serious consideration this session. He alluded particularly to one most important branch of business, which was almost entirely of a domestic nature. He meant the review and regulation of the Corn Laws—a business, in order to be properly executed, requiring as much time, as much information, as much care, attention, and circumspection, as almost any subject that could occupy the attention of parliament. Why, then, might not this be proceeded with in the meantime; there being a clear understanding, that ministers were not to be interfered with in the prosecution of the negociation, or in any matters connected with the present state of our affairs on the continent?
There was another most important subject which might easily be proceeded with,—be meant the hearing of appeal causes; a subject of so much interest, that their lordships thought it requisite to alter the whole scheme of the courts of justice, in order to give it additional facilities. This their lordships would never have consented to, had it not been their resolution, really to proceed with promptitude and dispatch in the hearing of these causes.—These considerations, he should have thought, ought to have deterred the Prince Regent's ministers from coming to the House with such a recommendation as this, if it could possibly have been dispensed with. At the same time, he was aware that the opinion of an individual could not have sufficient influence with the House to prevent its concurring in this motion, recommended as it was, even
326
though that individual were decidedly to object to the motion. He did not, as he had already stated, mean to urge his reluctance in acceding to the motion so far as to give it a decided opposition; but he could not help stating the grounds of that reluctance in agreeing to it, which, on consideration of all the circumstances, he acknowledged that he felt to agree to this adjournment. His object, he again stated, in pressing the importance of parliament going on with such business as might be conveniently proceeded with, was not to embarrass ministers in the prosecution of the great object in which they were engaged at this moment. He was fully aware of the vast importance of that object, to which the House would have a future opportunity of giving such attention as its magnitude deserved; and, under all the circumstances, be thought it right to state, that the subject to which he alluded ought to meet, not only with a deep and careful, but also a most dispassionate attention. Having thus stated the view which he had of the present motion of adjournment, and the circumstances connected with it, he did not think it necessary to attempt throwing any further obstacle in the way of the motion; being of opinion, that he had discharged his duty in calling their lordships' attention to the sacrifices which they were making, in giving their concurrence.
The Earl of Liverpooldid not feel himself called upon to say any more than a very few words, with reference to what had been said by the noble marquis. He agreed with him, that, notwithstanding such a mode of adjournment, a motion to that effect coming recommended by Message, any peer might, undoubtedly, oppose the motion, if he thought proper to do so. But the respect which was generally shewn to such a Message, under such, circumstances, made it rather an unusual proceeding to oppose a motion of adjournment founded upon such a recommendation, and under such circumstances as were at present known to exist. Then, as to the question of the expediency of such an adjournment, the noble marquis had said, that the ministers would not be embarrassed nor interfered with, even although parliament should continue sitting. Yet he (lord Liverpool) must observe, that this was an argument which might apply to every adjournment, under any circumstances. But the real question was, whether, upon the whole, it was advisable that

327
this motion should be acceded to by their lordships, on a view of all the circumstances with which it was connected; or, in other words, whether upon the whole, the advantages which might be derived from such an adjournment, considered with reference to time and circumstances, were such as might be fairly considered as counterbalancing any inconvenience that might be supposed to result from such an adjournment. With respect to its being desirable that the House should adjourn, he could only throw himself on the indulgence of their lordships. To enter into any explanation at this moment would be obviously improper; no such explanations could, therefore, be reasonably expected to be given. Certainly, however, before the Prince Regent's ministers thought it right to advice his Royal Highness to send this recommendation to their lordships, they had taken into consideration the possible or probable inconveniencies that might result from the adjournment now proposed. The result of their deliberations and inquiries on this point had been, to convince them, that no very material inconvenience was likely to arise from the proposed measure of adjournment to any important interests whatever: that was, that no inconvenience was at all likely to arise from it, which could equal the inconvenience that might result from parliament's continuing sitting. This was all that he conceived it proper at present to say on the subject.
The Earl of Darnleyasked, how was it possible to say that no material inconvenience could result from this adjournment, when it was notorious that there was such an arrear of causes in that House; causes which ought to be proceeded in without a moment's unnecessary delay? How was it possible to say, that no material inconvenience would arise, when the regulation of the corn laws formed an object of so much importance, and one which demanded prompt attention? Parliament had already adjourned far beyond the usual period of adjournment, and now it was called upon to adjourn again. He did not mean, however, to set his own individual opinion against what appeared to be the general sense of the House: he should not, therefore, oppose the motion: he was as anxious as any of their lordships that ministers should not be interfered with in the great object about which they were at present particularly employed: but he thought they might have taken the pledge that
328
they should not be interfere with even though the House were to continue sitting. Though he did not decidedly oppose the motion, he could not help thinking that ministers would have acted a wiser part if they had not pressed this motion of adjournment. The hearing of the appeals would be interrupted; and a press of business would come at the close of the session, so as to render it impossible that it should meet with the proper and requisite attention.
The Lord Chancellorhad merely a few words to say with respect to the appeal causes. On the best judgment that he could form, it appeared to him, that the adjournment need be attended with little or no inconvenience in regard to the hearing of appeal causes, provided their lordships thought proper to prevent it. If he did not sit there, he must of course sit in the court of Chancery during the three weeks to which the adjournment extended. If then, as much of his time was taken from the court of Chancery, and devoted to the hearing of appeals, on the meeting of parliament after the adjournment, as the court of Chancery now gained of that time by the proposed measure, he did not see that much inconvenience was likely to arise from that adjournment, with respect to the hearing of the appeal causes.
The Earl of Derbysaid, the adjournment must, if it took place at all, be, in reality, protracted till the middle of April. At the close of the adjournment now proposed would come Passion week, and then Easter; so that this adjournment, though nominally only for three weeks, was, in fact, an adjournment for six weeks. He had discharged his duty in stating this. The ministers might have given credit to the pledge of his noble friend that they would not be interrupted or interfered with by the sitting of parliament, in the prosecution of the important subject which now engaged their particular attention. About the negociation it might be improper at present to say any thing farther than this—he wished, from the bottom of his heart, that ministers might be able to bring that negociation to the desirable termination—that they might be able to bring about a peace founded on a solid basis,—a peace likely to be lasting, and one which would be safe and honourable for all parties. No impediment would be thrown by him in the way of ministers in the conduct of this negociation—none would have been thrown in their way by him, though parliament,

329
had continued sitting. A future opportunity would occur for the full investigation and discussion of the conduct of ministers in this respect; and he should be most happy to find that their conduct had been such as be could conscientiously approve and applauds.
The Duke of Norfolksaid, it was very possible, that after the close of the present adjournment another might be proposed. No precise judgment could be at present formed, even by the ministers themselves, whether a further adjournment might or might not be thought necessary. But unless they thought it probable that parliament could really proceed to business at the close of the adjournment now moved, it was desirable that they should give some notice to the agents who were concerned in appeal causes. Many of these had, to his knowledge, come to town already in the full expectation that parliament was now to have proceeded to business. In some way or other, notice might be given them before the end of the present period of adjournment, that another adjournment was in contemplation, in case another should be thought advisable.
The Earl of Liverpoolsaid, he could of course give no positive pledge now on that subject. It must in some measure depend on circumstances. But he could say, at present it was intended, that parliament should proceed to business at the close of the present adjournment. As to the inconvenience stated by a noble lord on the other side (Derby), from Passion week and Easter coming close upon the period of the proposed adjournment, that circumstance had been considered; and it was expected that matters could be so arranged, that the inconvenience would not be very material.
The motion was then put, and carried; and the Lord Chancellor accordingly declared that the House was adjourned till Monday the 21st of March instant.