Sitting of 3 April 1815

CONGRESS AT VIENNA—DECLARATION OF THE ALLIES.
The House met pursuant to adjournment. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in moving the postponement of the Committee of Supply until Wednesday, took occasion to state, that on that day an important communication would be made to the House, upon the subject of existing circumstances.
Mr. Whitbreadsaid, he should be glad to know whether any other minister was expected in the House in the course of the evening, and whether the Secretary for Foreign Affairs was, likely to attend? An expectation very, naturally prevailed that some communication would be made to the House respecting, certain extraordinary events, and the prospects, as far as ministers could ascertain, likely to arise
[338
out of those events. The right hon. gentleman had had the second reading of the Assessed Taxes Bill postponed to Monday, next, but he had not told the House whether he then meant to move its second reading, or whether, he proposed to move a farther postponement; nor had the right hon. gentleman stated whether, as rumour represented, it was his intention to abandon this Bill altogether, and to resort again to the property tax. In such circumstances some explanation was obviously necessary; but haying Stated thus much, he would abstain from saying more, than merely to express a wish that ministers would spontaneously come forward at this interesting crisis, and make such a communication as was due to that House and to the country.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerapprphended that, if the House should continue to bit for a short time, his noble friend the Secretary, of State for Foreign Affairs might be expected; but lest he should not appear in his place, before the House adjourned, he thought it proper, to state, in order to prevent any misapprehensions, that it was intended very shortly to make a communication to that House, from the Prince Regent, of the steps, which ministers, were taking, and meant to take, at the present crisis, together with a statement of the motives which had determined their conduct.
Mr. Whitbreaddisclaimed any wish to hurry ministers, or to exact, from them any premature communication, but he could not forbear to express, his confident hope, that a certain declaration, purporting to emanate from the Congress at Vienna, was an infamous forgery, inasmuch as it went to sanction the doctrine of assassination. He trusted, therefore, for the honour and character, of this country, that some of the names annexed to that paper were never authorized to sign any such document. While the noble Secretary, for Foreign Affairs was at the Congress, he was understood to combine in himself all the powers of the executive government; but it was quite impossible to suppose that such powers, were extended to lords Wellington, Clancarty, Cathcart, and Stewart, that they were authorized to put their names to such an infamous paper, or that they were invested with a power to declare war against any state.
The Chancellor of the Exchequermaintained that the paper alluded to, did not in any point authorize such an interpretation

339]
as the hon. member had thought proper to give it.
Mr. Whitbreadobserved, that in a publication of yesterday, in which the doctrine of assassination was unblushingly avowed, [Goldsmith's Anti-Gallican Monitor,] this paper was quoted as a direct justification of that doctrine; and referring to the promulgation of the same doctrine from the same quarter, at a former period, in which the assassination of the person now possessing the government of France was openly recommended, the hon. gentleman stated, that a noble relative of his (earl Grey) had in another place strongly protested against that doctrine, being seconded in his reprobation of it by the marquis Wellesley, who was then a member of the Cabinet. It would also be recollected that he (Mr. W.) had, in that House, entered his protest against this abominable doctrine; and Mr. Perceval, who was himself, within twelve months afterwards, the victim of assassination, strongly disclaimed (if, indeed, a disclaimer were necessary) any concurrence in such doctrine on the part of his Majesty's Government. Nevertheless, this paper had the tendency and the effect of unsheathing the dagger of the assassin. Of this effect, indeed, there could be no doubt, as had been argued by the writer alluded to, who had even had the hardihood to name the persons who were fit to do the work, calling in to the aid of his recommendation this reported Declaration from Congress, which, if words were to be interpreted according to their natural import, did unquestionably hold out a defence for assassination. Were ministers, then, prepared to abide by and justify such an extraordinary document?
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that ministers had in no degree departed, nor were desirous of departing, from the principles of Mr. Perceval, or the sentiments of lord Wellesley, on the occasion alluded to by the hon. member; but the names annexed to this paper, if it were authentic, afforded an ample pledge that nothing inconsistent with what was loyal, honourable, and proper, could have been intended by it.
Mr. Whitbreadasked then, whether the right hon. gentleman meant to express a doubt of the authenticity of this paper; for there seemed something consolatory in his parenthesis, "if it were authentic." Here the hon. gentleman adverted to some muttering on the ministerial benches, observing that the right hon. gentleman
[340
could speak for himself without being influenced by the half articulate sounds of those, who meant, no doubt, to show a great deal of wisdom in their private hints, although, when they addressed the House, they never happened to manifest any wisdom whatever. The hon. member concluded with repeating his question, whether the paper alluded to, was deemed authentic by ministers?
The Chancellor of the Exchequeranswered, that he would not be understood to say that that paper was disavowed by his Majesty's Government.
The motion for postponing the Committee of Supply was agreed to. Upon the motion for postponing the Committee, of Ways and Means to Wednesday,
Mr. Whitbreadobserved, that the right hon. gentleman appeared, in the course of what he had said, to cast some doubt upon the authenticity of this infamous paper. The right hon. gentleman had urged that the names annexed to this paper, afforded a pledge that nothing inconsistent with what was loyal, honourable, and proper, could have been intended: that was not enough: did the right hon. gentleman mean to contend that the paper itself contained nothing, inconsistent with loyalty, honour, and propriety? because, if so, he was at issue with him on that point. He wished to know whether the paper alluded to, was meant to form a part of the promised communication, and also whether the persons whose names were attached to this paper, had any authority to sign such a document?
The Chancellor of the Exchequerexpressed his opinion, that this paper contained nothing to sanction the doctrine of assassination, and this was all he thought proper to say upon the subject at present.
Mr. Whitbreadagain asked, whether it was intended to lay this paper before the House, with the promised communication, and also the authority upon which it was signed by our minister?
No answer was made, and the House adjourned.