Sitting of 14 September 1831

MINUTES.
Returns ordered. On the Motion of Mr. O'CONNELL, the quantity of Matt Spirits distilled by each Distiller since 1827, with the Drawback allowed:—On the Motion of Mr. CROKER, of the number of Rated Houses above 10 l. in Appleby; and the amount of the Assessed Taxes paid by the same place:—On the Motion of Mr. O'CONNELL, for Returns relating to the Distilleries, and the Drawback on Malt used in Ireland.
Petitions presented. By Mr. BHISCOE, from Inhabitants of Clapham and Battersea, against persecution for Religious Opinions. By the Earl of BELFAST, from Belfast, and other places in Ireland, in favour of the Kildare-street Society. By Colonel TORRENS, from George Fuller, a non-resident Freeman of the City of Canterbury, praying that he might not be deprived of his franchise. By Mr. CHAPMAN, from Moate, Westmeath, for the introduction of Poor-laws into Ireland. By Lord TULLAMORE, from Distillers in Ireland, for an alteration in taking the Malt averages. By Mr. HUME, from the Trade Societies of Nottingham, praying for further investigation into the case of the Deacles. By Mr. O'CONNELL, from Annadown, in Galway, praying for the disarming of the Yeomanry of Ireland.

OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH.
Mr. Humepresented a Petition from persons engaged in the retail trades of the metropolis, praying that the House would be pleased to pass a law to prevent the carrying on of those trades on a Sunday. He had felt it his duty to present the petition, but he could not concur in its prayer, for there had been already too much legislation on the subject.
Mr. Pagetagreed with the hon. Member, and should decidedly oppose any augmentation of the severity of the laws in this respect. The obvious remedy was, for masters to pay their labourers on some other day than Saturday, at an early hour on that day.
Mr. Wilkssaid, the existing penalties were imposed in the reign of Charles 2nd, and were perfectly inadequate to effect the proposed object. Only one penalty could be inflicted for one day, however frequent, the offence, and it was very difficult to obtain a conviction. The respectable inhabitants could prevent the practice; Islington was an example. There the parishioners had come to a resolution not to deal with parties who adopted the practice.
Mr. Hume Mr. Hume moved, that the petition be printed, and said, in Scotland they had no penalties to compel the observance of the Sabbath, yet it was well observed.

CHURCH PROPERTY.
Mr. O'Connellpresented a Petition from the Roman Catholics of Killasty in the county of Tipperary, praying that persons of every religious persuasion in Ireland might be compelled to pay their own clergy, and that the property in the hands of the Church might be resumed, and applied to national purposes.
Sir Richard Vyvyanbegged to ask the hon. and learned member for Kerry, what he meant, or what the petitioners meant, by the Church property being resumed?
Mr. O'Connellsaid that the British Parliament, at the period of the Reformation, had taken the Church property, and given a considerable portion to the Crown, which devised the greater part afterwards to powerful and influential persons, whose families, in many instances, enjoyed this property up to the present moment. The remainder of the Church property Parliament bestowed on the members of another Church, differing from that which originally held it. This, he contended, was the indisputable right of Parliament, and what the petitioners prayed was, that Parliament might resume the property so granted, and appropriate it to national purposes. This, however, he admitted, could not be done without great cruelty, unless an adequate provision was made for those who had taken orders in the Established Church, under the sanction of an Act of Parliament. He had given no opinion on the petition, but, being called upon by the hon. Baronet, he felt bound to say that he could see no reason why every man should not pay his clergyman precisely as he paid his physician and his lawyer; and there seemed to be no reason why property given by Parliament to the Church was not capable of being resumed.
Sir Richard Vyvyanreally asked the question with a view of ascertaining the hon. and learned Member's opinion on the subject. It was quite right, and perhaps natural, for a person of the Roman Catholic persuasion to say, that he thought the property taken from the Roman Catholic Church at the time of the Reformation should now be given back to it.
Mr. O'Connellprotested against its being supposed that he wished the property of the Established Church to be transferred to the Catholic Clergy. He should oppose such a measure as determinedly as the hon. Baronet, for nothing would tend so much to render them useless.
Mr. Humesaid, that not being a Roman Catholic, he entertained a very strong opinion on this subject—and he found that every one out of doors had formed a strong opinion on it likewise; and it was only within the walls of Parliament that people seemed afraid to speak out. Where was the use of being mealy-mouthed on this subject? Every one knew that the clergy who were the present possessors of Church property had only a life interest in it. It was public property in every sense of the word, and it was competent for Parliament to appropriate it for the purposes of education, of religion, or in any way it thought proper.
Mr. Lefroydid not rise to protract that discussion, but he wished to correct a mis-statement which had been circulated through the usual channels of information. The hon. and learned Gentleman, the member for Kerry, was represented to have said, that two-thirds of the beneficed clergy of Ireland were absentees. There were altogether in Ireland 1,295 beneficed clergy, of whom 1,192 were resident, and employed 750 curates. It was much to be regretted that such misstatements should go abroad; but the fact was, that the Church of Ireland was comparatively a helpless Church in that House. Let them beware, however, for the moment the Church of Ireland was broken down that of England would not last very long. The hon. and learned Gentleman was also represented to have said that Archdeacon Magee held no less than eleven parishes.
Mr. O'Connell. Eleven livings.
Mr. Lefroy: The Archdeacon held the living of Wicklow, and the archdeaconry of Wicklow, the latter being a sinecure. He also had a small parish in Dublin of 150 l. a year, out of which he paid a curate 100 l. a year, and a small living in the county of Galway. Here, therefore, were only four livings in place of eleven. Even if he had eleven, it would not follow that they would be adequate to his support, for he knew an instance in the diocese of Clonfert of eleven vicarages, from the whole of which the clergyman derived only 114 l. a year. He had in addition fifteen acres of glebe land. He would boldly assert, that there was not in existence a more laborious, pious, and zealous set of men than the Protestant clergy of Ireland. The property of the Church was as sacred as private property, and they had no more
22
right to touch one to an the other. He trusted he never should see the day when such revolutionary protects would be for a moment listened to in that House.
Sir John Sebrightsaid, he was neither a Catholic nor an Irishman, and he did not hesitate to declare, that matters ought not to remain as they now were in Ireland. Suppose in England two or three Roman Catholics resided in a populous parish, consisting, besides these two or three, of Protestants, what would be said if all the Protestants were taxed to support the Catholic clergyman? He had lived among Protestants and Catholics in many parts of Europe, and he was ashamed to say, that he never witnessed more contention about religion, and more bigotry, than in that House. He trusted he should not die until he saw the day when all classes of society would be treated as men, and not as Protestants or Catholics.
Colonel Beresfordsaid, his hon. and learned friend (Mr. Lefroy) merely rose to correct a mis-statement, and he was fully justified in taking that opportunity of expressing his opinion on the sentiments expressed by the member for Kerry. He wished as much as any man to see bigotry and religious disputation excluded from the discussions of that House; but as an Irish Protestant he had a right to express his opinion as well as the hon. Baronet. The bigotry did not commence with them, but with the persons who were daily making attacks on the Irish Church.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, that he had been charged with misrepresentation when he said Archdeacon Magee had eleven livings. The hon. and learned Member (Mr. Lefroy) allowed him four. The hon. and learned Member forgot, however, that the union of Wicklow consisted of six parishes. Five, therefore, were to be added to the hon. Member's account, which made nine. Then there was the archdeaconry of Kilmacure, from which Archdeacon Magee took his title, and which made ten—and, just before his father's death, the rev. gentleman had got the golden prebend of Swords, which completed the eleven. He (Mr. O'Connell) was not less correct in his statement that two-thirds of the parishes in Ireland had not resident Rectors. There were 2,500 Catholic parish priests in Ireland, and only 1,132 resident Protestant clergy. Besides, what was called residence? Visiting a parish once a year. In the parish in which he resided there were

23
nearly 5,000 Roman Catholics and twenty Protestants, fifteen of whom were Englishmen employed in the Coast Guard Service. The 5,000, however, paid the Rector his tithes, though he had only five Protestant parishioners. No one in the parish ever saw the Rector; but he came a distance of sixty miles at the last election to vote against him. He had heard with inexpressible delight the liberal view taken by the hon. Baronet opposite, of the relation in which Catholics stood towards the Established Church. If a colony of twenty Irish Catholics were planted in an English parish, would not the Protestant inhabitants exclaim against being taxed to support a Catholic priest, for the twenty individuals from another country, and of a different religion? There was no Englishman who would not exclaim at the existence of such a state of things; and he asked, was it unreasonable, when the people of Ireland saw that England had an Established Church professing the religion of the people, and Scotland an Established Church (differing from the Established Church of England, but professing the religion of the people), that the people of Ireland should ask—not for an Established Church—but that they should not pay a clergy, who, as they conceived, did them no service?
Mr. Estcourtasked the hon. and learned member for Kerry, whether he understood him rightly that it was his object to take away the property which now goes to the maintenance of the Established Church in Ireland?
Mr. O'Connell: Yes, certainly.
Mr. James Grattansaid, his opinion decidedly was, that a portion of the Church property should be applied to the repairs of the church and the support of the poor. He regretted that Dr. Magee had acted so indiscreetly as to insist at first on a composition of 1,800 l. a year for the living of Wicklow, for which he afterwards accepted of 1,500 l. There was much to be corrected in the Church of Ireland.
Mr. Huntagreed with the hon. member for Middlesex, that they ought not to be mealy-mouthed on this subject. He could see no reason why the Church property given to great families should not be resumed, and applied to public purposes, as well as the property now held by the Church. The hon. and learned member for Kerry informed them, that part of the
24
property taken from the Catholic Church came into the possession of the Crown, another part fell to private individuals, and a third to the Established Church in Ireland. He thought it ought all to be resumed.
Mr. Lefroysaid, the prebend of Swords was not held by Archdeacon Magee. He saw no reason why Roman Catholics should not contribute to the support of the Established Church.
Mr. Shawbelieved Dr. Magee had nothing to do with the prebend of Swords, and there was no cure attached to the archdeaconry. The real fact was, that two or three small chapelries were united in the union of Wicklow, each unable to support a clergyman, and that one of the sinecures of which Archdeacon Magee was accused was his archdeaconry in the county of Galway. The question was, were they to have an Established Church in Ireland or not? The member for Kerry said, let all persons pay their own clergy, as they did their physician or lawyer; but the constitution of human nature was such, that unless the State took upon itself to provide religion for its subjects, they would not seek for it. If Church property was not respected, other property would not continue long safe.
Mr. Henry Grattansaid, the Protestants of Ireland wished as much as the Catholics that some arrangement should be made with respect to Church property which would give more satisfaction. It was by the exertions of the Protestants of Wicklow that the demand of Archdeacon Magee was reduced from 1,800 l. to I,100 l. He regretted the intemperate language used by the Archdeacon, in a pamphlet written by him in answer to Dr. Doyle. In this pamphlet he used these words—"There is not a priest in your Church who preaches, or who can preach, the real doctrine of salvation."
Mr. Northsaid, he had the pleasure of knowing Archdeacon Magee, and he was one of the highest ornaments of the Church. Whatever doctrine he put forth, either in speech or writing, he sincerely felt, and he was more anxious for the real welfare of the people of Ireland than the loudest patriots on the other side of the House. There were, he had no doubt, Catholic gentlemen in the House who would be ready to avow this. He should not enter into the great question of the Church Establishment of Ireland; but he must

25
express his regret, that there was no Minister present to hear the tocsin sounded against that Church, and to tell the House what advice he was prepared to give the Sovereign, in conformity with that solemn obligation into which he had lately entered. The Protestants of Ireland would not allow the Established Church of that country to be overwhelmed without a manly struggle—because it was connected with a principle which they held dear as men of conscience and character.
Colonel Conollysaid: I rise, Sir, to disabuse the public mind of impressions which are sought to be made disadvantageous to the Established Church in Ireland. It is asserted that the payment of tithe is unjust and oppressive, and it is contended that persons are chargeable with the maintenance of a Church to which they do not belong. Sir, the right of the clergyman to his tithe has been uniformly acknowledged by the Legislature as anterior to that of the landlord to his rent; and this has been particularly recognised by the Tithe Composition Act, an Act of recent date. But, Sir, I contend that it is the property, and not the tenant, that pays the Church, and that the tenantry have found the lands they now hold subject to this charge on their taking them at rents; and that if tithe were abolished it would not at all relieve the occupant, but it would be added to the rent of the landlord. I do not, Sir, speak my own opinions; I have the highest authority for my assertion. The present Archbishop of Cashel, in a protracted conversation I had with his Grace, held these opinions, and quite satisfied me that the removal of tithe would fall more onerously on the tenant than the enforcement of it. Sir, the Church Establishment of Ireland has been spoken of in very offensive terms in this House; I have often listened to it with pain; it has been charged with bigotry and intolerance. Now, Sir, what is the case? The Church of Ireland is acting; on the defensive, and if ever there was a fight "pro aris et focis," that is the nature of the combat the Church of Ireland is at present engaged in. Though the Church is charged in various ways, a very large number of the clergy are now deprived of their ordinary revenues, and many clergymen are actually in a state of destitution. It has been my fate to state that on another occasion in this House. That a warfare does exist against it, that
26
that warfare is extending, and will soon extend to rents, there cannot be any question; and that it is advanced for the purpose of destroying the Established Church, the principal link between Great Britain and Ireland, I cannot entertain a doubt.
Mr. James E. Gordonsaid, if night after night attacks were made upon the Established Church, he would read the oath which Catholics had taken not to upset it, and would proceed to ulterior measures in that respect. In fact, he would re-agitate the Catholic Question from the circumference to the centre of the empire.
Petition to be printed.

TREGONY PETITION.
Mr. O'Connell Mr. O'Connell rose to move the Order of the Day for resuming the debate on the Petition of Mr. Gurney, relative to the Tregony election. The Committee on this election had refused to hear allegations as to bribery, inasmuch as the petitioner was neither a candidate nor an elector. He cast no imputation, however, upon the Committee; there was no imputation on the returning officer; and he would not enter upon the law of the case, although he considered it worthy of consideration by a Select Committee. As the Committee upon the election had declared the petition against the sitting Members to be frivolous and vexatious, there was no doubt that the petitioners, one and all, were liable to the costs of the appeal. What he meant to insist upon was, the right of contribution amongst the whole of the petitioners, under the sixty-fourth clause of the Grenville Act. The fifty-seventh section of the Act expressly said, that although any one petitioner might be sued for the costs, yet that such person should have an equal right of recovery against all the other petitioners as was taken against him in the first instance. The award of payment of costs rested with a particular officer, and his certificate was conclusive in a Court of Law. In this case the officer taxed the costs, and fixed them on Mr. Gurney alone, and by so doing had deprived him of contribution under the sixty-fourth section of the Act. Here there were two questions; first, had the officer done wrong? And secondly, if such wrong existed, was Mr. Gurney to have no remedy? He contended that the certificate, as issued by the officer, was erroneous, and therefore,

27
that Mr. Gurney was entitled to a remedy. He wished, therefore, for the appointment of a Select Committee to investigate a subject which he thought to be of considerable importance.
The Speakersaid, the first question here was, whether the petition of Mr. Gurney should now lie on the Table? The petition was a very long one, and could not be received without being printed. That was done, and then came the question whether this petition should be received or not, inasmuch as it complained of the decision of the Committee? That was now abandoned; and then came the question as to whether the taxing officers under the Act had or had not performed their duty in making only one of the petitioners liable to the costs, and thereby precluding him from his remedy against his co-petitioner? The Act alluded to provided for this case, and upon the report of the taxing officers, the certificate must issue as it had done in this case. By 28th George 3rd, the costs having been taxed, any one of the petitioners might be proceeded against, and by the 52nd of the same King, additional security was given for costs, and the 9th George 4th, gave a remedy against the surety who petitioned against an election, such surety being obliged to enter into a bond to the amount of 1,000 l. The House should consider whether they had jurisdiction in this case, which, after all, was the first and only material question.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, after what had fallen from Mr. Speaker, he would withdraw the petition for the present.
Lord G. Somerset, as Chairman of this election, said he was glad the petition was withdrawn, for he could say, that the Committee had taken great pains in the investigation of this election.
Mr. Shaw beggedto acknowledge to the hon. and learned member for Kerry, that he had brought this matter forward in the most candid and manly manner.
Petition withdrawn.

SUGAR REFINING ACT.
Lord Althorp Lord Althorp moved the Order of the Day for the further consideration of the report of the Reform Bill.
Mr. Burgebegged leave to inquire what day the noble Lord meant to fix on for the further consideration of the report on the Sugar Refining Bill. The large minority, or rather the very trifling majority,
28
the other evening on that Bill, evinced the anxiety and necessity of a thorough discussion of its principle, and probable operation, and it was plain such a discussion could not be ensured, if the Order of the Day were moved after the House had concluded its ordinary labours, that is, at two o'clock in the morning. Hon. Members would then naturally betake themselves to repose, and the subject could not be fairly examined unless the noble Lord consented to fix a day apart for the discussion. He had an amendment to propose when the question should come before the House, to the effect that a Select Committee should inquire into the effect on the West- Indian interests of the proposed plan of home refining.
Lord Althorpcould not fix a day for the discussion, but would give due notice, so as to afford hon. Members the opportunity they desired of expressing their sentiments on the bill.

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM—BILL FOR ENGLAND—FURTHER CONSIDER ATION OF THE REPORT.
The Order of the Day read for the further consideration of the Report of the Committee on the Reform of Parliament (England) Bill.
Several clauses were, with some verbal amendments, agreed to.
On the clause respecting Courts of Registration,
Mr. C. W. Wynnwished to know if the number of Courts of Registration in each county was to be specified. There was a provision that no one was to go more than fifteen miles to vote, but there was no regulation as to the distance persons might have to go to prove their votes. He must further observe, that there were no directions who were to attend such Courts, and no person would be able to tell what Court he was to attend.
Lord Althorpsaid, he was unable to give a precise answer to his right hon. friend. The point was new—be did not remember to have heard it urged in the Committee.
Upon that part of the thirty-ninth clause which directs justices of the peace in Quarter Sessions to divide their respective counties into convenient districts for polling, and to appoint in each district a convenient place for taking the poll at all future elections of knights of the shire, in such manner that no person shall have to travel more than fifteen miles

29
from the property in respect of which he claims to vote,
Mr. C. W. Wynnsaid, he had great doubts whether this clause would answer its proposed purpose. If voters were to be carried fifteen miles, they would certainly require some refreshment, and they would have it, if not from the candidates themselves, from their friends and adherents. Much expense must also be incurred in carrying people that distance and back again. If the objects of economy and prevention of excitement were to be fully attained, polls must be parochial or nearly so. There were many difficulties, he confessed, in this project, but he thought it might be possible to accomplish the proposed purposes better than by the clause under consideration.
Lord Althorpsaid, he must admit, that in all county elections there must be a certain expense in conveying voters, but he thought it would be very small under the new, as compared to the old system. If voters could poll in their respective parishes, he was prepared to admit that it would be an excellent arrangement; but as a set-off against travelling expenses, agents and poll-clerks must be employed in each village, and their expenses would probably exceed the expense of carriage. On the whole, therefore, he was favourable to the plan proposed in the clause, by which, even in the largest counties, no voters would have to travel a greater distance than fifteen miles, and the majority a considerably less distance; and as most county voters had conveyances of their own, he believed the present would turn out, after all, the cheaper arrangement.
Mr. Baringdid not see so much disadvantage with regard to voting as to registration. He thought it would have been better to have had a separate bill for that object alone, which, if then found unfit for the intended purpose, could have been repealed, altered, or modified without causing the excitement that any attempt to alter the whole Bill would create. He thought, further, it would be found necessary to vest the returning officer with some discretionary power to prolong the time of an election. He had known instances where the voters of one particular candidate could not be brought up to vote until the third day.
Clause agreed to.
The Amendments in the other clauses were all agreed to.
The Speakerthen asked if any hon. Member had any clause to propose?
Mr. Alderman Woodproposed a clause making it imperative on the clerks of the different livery companies of the city of London to furnish every year to the town clerk, a return of the different liverymen in each company entitled to vote.
Lord Althorpagreed that, from the peculiar nature of the local regulations of the city of London, such a clause was necessary.
Mr. Goulburncomplained, that the wording of this clause was almost as long as the Bill itself. It introduced into the city of London a regulation which was not to prevail in other parts of the kingdom. In that city the clerks of the livery companies were to make out a list of the voters—in other places, that list was to be made out by the overseers of the parish in which the voters resided.
Clause agreed to.
Colonel Sibthorp Colonel Sibthorp rose to make the Motion of which he had given notice, with respect to the four parishes which the noble Lord, by his Bill, had, in schedule H, taken from the division of Kesteven, in the county of Lincoln, and placed in the division of Lindsey. His Motion was, to restore them to the former district. By an Act of Parliament in 1812, for regulating the navigation of the river William, it was provided, that the Magistrates acting under that Act, should take cognizance of all the southern side of that river in the county of the city of Lincoln, including the four parishes he had alluded to; and that they should be all considered as in the division of Kesteven. Not only was it proposed by the Bill to break up that arrangement, but the effect would be to deprive the freeholders in those parishes of the rights which they at present enjoyed. In order, therefore, to remedy the grievance complained of, he would move a clause to the effect, "That all freeholders whose freeholds in the county of the city of Lincoln are situated on the northern side of the river Witham, shall vote in future for the Representatives in Parliament for the division of Lindsey, in the county of Lincoln; and all freeholders whose freeholds are situated on the southern side of the aforesaid river Witham, in the said city, including the four parishes annexed by charter to the said county of the city of Lincoln, shall vote in future as freeholders for the Representatives in Parliament

31
for the divisions of Kesteven and Holland; and that the same rights and powers of exercising the elective franchise, inasmuch as applies, by the present Bill, to leaseholders and copyholders in counties generally, be extended to, and exercised in future by, leaseholders and copyholders within the city and county of the city of Lincoln, with regard to the proposed respective divisions."
On the Motion that the clause be brought up,
Lord Althorpsaid, that he did not see the propriety of the division which the gallant Colonel wished for; and was of opinion, that the parishes in question would gain rather than lose by the arrangement which had been made respecting them.
Mr. Wilks, while he admitted that the division recommended by the gallant Colonel was the natural one, thought that inconvenience might arise to the voters, in consequence of the distance they might have to go to the place of poll, should the proposition be adopted.
Mr. Crokersaid, the noble Lord had consented to a similar arrangement with that now proposed with regard to Bristol, and he saw no reason why it could not also be acted on in Lincoln.
Lord John Russellsaid, that unless some special reason were assigned, a town like Lincoln ought not to be divided into two counties, or parts of counties.
Colonel Sibthorpknew it was the most anxious desire of all the freeholders to preserve their franchise in the division of the county to which they belonged.
Lord Althorpsaid, he did not think the hon. and gallant officer had thrown any new light upon the subject. The Motion had been already discussed, and as he had given his opinion on it before, it was of no use to again repeat it. He should certainly oppose the Motion.
Clause withdrawn.
Colonel Sibthorpagain rose to bring forward the other motion of which he had given notice—namely "to disqualify from any future power of exercising the elective franchise, all persons holding official civil situations during the pleasure of the Crown." He confessed that it was with great surprise that, in the recent debate on the Dublin Election, he had heard the right hon. Chief Secretary for Ireland state, that" It could not be disguised or denied that the Government had been naturally anxious that the views which they
32
took of a great political question should be supported by their dependents." He must say he entirely differed from the right hon. Gentleman, and was astonished that such doctrines should proceed from those who had talked so much of the expediency of the independent and uncontrolled election of Members of Parliament, and who had declared that the object of the Bill before the House was to strike at the root of all that corruption, which proceeded from what they termed the boroughmongering system. Under these circumstances, it naturally occurred to him to consider how Government might be disposed to influence the conduct of their dependents under this new Bill. When he looked at the Acts of Parliament by which even Captains of revenue cutters, Commissioners of Customs, and persons in similar capacities, were deprived of the elective franchise, he wished to ask what, under the 10 l. household franchise, would be the state of Greenwich, Woolwich, Dover, &c.? The hon. and gallant Member concluded by moving, that all persons who actually enjoyed any situation or office under the control or pleasure of the Crown, or of the heads of Departments, or others directly or indirectly connected with the public Civil Service, or any person receiving fees or salaries under Government, should be disqualified to vote for Representatives during that time, and within six months of holding the situation or office.
Lord John Russellsaid, this undoubtedly was a most important business, and, if brought forward at all, should be made the subject of a separate Bill. If it was brought forward in that shape he would give it his best consideration.
Sir Charles Wetherellobserved, that if this principle were to be put in action, the Reform Bill should have been divided into twenty-five separate Bills.
Mr. Shawsupported the Motion, and alluded to the gross instances of Government interference at the late Dublin election, in illustration of the necessity of not allowing persons dependent upon Government to vote at elections. The hon. Member was proceeding to make a statement in defence of Mr. Long, and in answer to the charges brought against this gentleman by the right hon. Secretary for Ireland on a former evening, but was prevented by calls to order.
Sir Richard Vyvyanthought, the substance

33
of this amendment ought to have been embodied in the Bill, as it was founded upon a principle which had been strongly supported by the hon. Gentlemen opposite, when they were on the Opposition side of the House. He observed, also, that he did not consider it usual to interrupt an hon. Member when he was making a statement which might be regarded personal.
Lord Althorpsaid, he had never heard any favourable opinion expressed by Ministers, when out of office, connected with the principle of the amendment. He should certainly have opposed it for one, but, at all events, there was neither time nor opportunity at present to discuss such an important subject. He should, therefore, oppose the clause being brought up.
Mr. Crokerdeclared, he could not join the hon. and gallant Member in any further disfranchisement.
Mr. Hudson Gurneysaid, he never could sanction such a principle, that persons were to be disfranchised because they happened to be in the public service: they were generally persons able to exercise a sound discretion; the principle was highly objectionable.
Motion withdrawn.
Mr. Crokersaid, that for the purpose of recording upon the Journals his opposition, and that of hon. Members around him, to the two disfranchising clauses, he would now move as an amendment on the first clause, "That all words after 'And be it enacted that,' should be left out."
The Motion was seconded by Lord Stormont, but negatived without a division, for which the hon. Member stated it was not his intention to press.
Mr. Crokerthen made a similar motion with respect to the second clause, which was negatived in like manner.
Lord Althorp Lord Althorp moved, as an amendment, in conformity with the explanation given by his noble friend (Lord John Russell) on a former evening, that in the 12th clause, instead of the words" The county of Glamorgan," the words "The counties of Carmarthen, Denbigh, and Glamorgan," should be inserted.
Lord Stormonthad understood no new county Members were to be allowed to Scotland, and if the principle of population was now to be acted on with regard to Wales, it ought also to be extended to the other country, in which there were several counties which contained four or
34
five times as large a population as those of Wales.
Lord Althorpsaid, he did not feel himself called upon then to enter into the subject; the proper time to discuss it would be when the Reform Bill for Scotland was before the House.
Sir George Warrenderbegged leave to be permitted to say, that the conduct of Ministers, with regard to Wales, induced him to indulge in the hope that the claims of the Scotch counties would be more fully considered. They had stronger claims than those of Wales to additional Representation, for they were far more populous and rich. He had no doubt that attempts would be made to give them this addition, when the Reform Bill for that country came under the consideration of the House, and he hoped the noble Lord would be prepared to concede their claims, as he had so very properly given way on this occasion.
Mr. Crokerregretted that he was likely to destroy the hon. Baronet's hopes, but he must do the noble Lord the justice to say, that he had very boldly and frankly admitted in answer to a question addressed to him by an hon. friend of his, that Government had no intention to increase the number of the Scotch county Members, for which determination, however, the noble Lord had assigned no reasons.
Lord Althorpsaid, he had declared he would assign his reasons when the Scotch Reform Bill was before the House.
Mr. C. W. Wynnmerely rose to express his satisfaction at hearing of the addition of Members proposed for Wales. It was doing, in fact, that justice to the Principality which it deserved, but he thought there was yet some distinction made between some of the counties of England and that country.
Motion agreed to.
Sir John Owen Sir John Owen rose to propose as an amendment, that the county of Pembroke should be added to the list of those Welch counties to which an additional Member was to be apportioned. He was aware, however, that it was of no use to divide the Committee.
Lord Althorp opposed the amendment.
Amendment negatived.
Mr. James L. Knightcomplained that a return, which he had moved for on the 17th of August, of a copy of the letters-patent under which the Governor of the Isle of Wight holds that office, was not yet

35
laid upon the Table. It related to a question of considerable importance —namely, whether there was a Sheriff in the island or not.
Lord Althorpsaid, he had inquired into the matter, and he found that there was a Sheriff of the island, and that that office was filled by the Governor for the time being.
Mr. James L, Knightsaid, that if the Governor was the Sheriff, of which there was no proof before the House, it was a great constitutional anomaly, that, as a military officer, he should execute the office of Sheriff.
The Attorney Generalsaid, that he had no means of stating why the return had not been made. As to the Governor being a military officer, every Sheriff had a military power, and was, under certain circumstances, a military officer. The Sheriff of Westmorland was always a military officer.
Mr. Goulburnobserved, that patents were recorded in the proper office, and the information might be procured from thence. They were not bound to send to the Governor for a copy.
Mr. Bonham Carterhad understood, upon inquiry, that the Governor of the Isle of Wight was, by his patent, constituted Sheriff and Coroner of the island, and was directed to hold Knights' Courts there. For several years past the Stewards, who were his deputies, had not exercised the duties of Sheriff, but the Knights' Courts had been held, and the Coroners for the island were not elected as in other parts of the country.
Mr. Crokerremarked, that the information of the hon. and learned Gentleman appeared, after all, to be only hearsay; and, for himself, he must disbelieve in the existence of the authority of the Governor as Sheriff, until he should actually see the patent creating it.
Mr. Baringthought it was the duty of the Secretary of State of the Home Department to see the order of the House carried into execution. It would be quite satisfactory if his noble friend would engage that the copy of the patent should be produced before the third reading.
Lord Althorphad no objection to that understanding.
Mr. James L. Knightrepeated, that it was of great importance that this information should be before the House; he had mentioned it in the Committee twice and
36
several times privately to Gentlemen connected with his Majesty's Government.
Lord Althorpthen moved the omission of the proviso in the 16th clause, "that nothing herein contained shall take away, or in any manner affect, the right of voting in the election of a Knight or Knights of the Shire, at present enjoyed by any person, or which may hereafter accrue to any person according to the laws now in force, in respect of any freehold property, rent charges, annuities, or any other right of voting now by law enjoyed in relation to the election of a Knight or Knights of the Shire." He proposed the omission because he had ascertained that the words were unnecessary. They were accordingly expunged.
Lord Althorpthen moved a verbal amendment in the 33rd clause, which was agreed to.
Lord John Russellsaid, that some observations had been made with respect to the jurisdiction of an Election Committee appointed by the House. Such a Committee had the power to alter the poll, and order the return to be amended, but could not alter the registry of the votes. Now, if that continued wrong, the poll and the return at the election might again be bad; to prevent which, he proposed to invest the Committee with the power of altering the registry of votes. He would, therefore, propose to insert the words, "and may direct the registry to be amended."
Mr. C. W. Wynnthought, that such an amendment would be placing great power in the hands of a Committee. The House ought to be very cautious how they delegated their powers to Committees; and, in his opinion, it would be better if the amendment went no further than to let the Committee report on the necessity of an amendment, leaving the House to adopt it, in pursuance of such Report, if it thought proper.
Lord John Russellthought, he should obviate every objection by proposing that the clause should stand as follows—to expunge the words "direct the return to be amended accordingly, or declare the election void as the case may be," and insert these, "shall report the same to the House, and the return shall be amended, or the election declared void, as the case may be, and the register amended accordingly."
Amendment agreed to.
Mr. C. W. Wynnsaid, there was a provision

37
in the 44th clause, directing that a Committee of the House of Commons should assess the amount of a Barrister's costs and charges. He thought it would be much better that this duty should be discharged by proper taxing officers.
Lord Althorpsaid, the duties of the Committee would be extremely simple, and he did not consider it involved any point of law.
Mr. C. W. Wynnsaid, he had no desire to see a Committee of the House of Commons converted into a Law Court, for the purpose of assessing costs and damages. Such a Committee ought to be purely political; and he therefore was of opinion, that the old Election Laws should be adhered to.
Mr. Goulburnbegged to ask the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite, how a party to whom costs and damages had been given by a Committee of the House of Commons, was to recover them.
The Attorney Generalsaid, that the amount awarded could be recovered in a Court of Law.
Lord Althorp Lord Althorp moved, that the proviso at the end of clause 44, viz. "That nothing in this Act contained shall prevent any Sheriff, or other returning officer, or their lawful deputies, from closing the poll previous to the expiration of the time fixed by this Act, in any case where the same might have been lawfully closed before the passing of the Act," be struck out. This proviso was unnecessary, because the proviso at the end of clause 48 was to the same effect.
Mr. Baringsuggested again, that it would be advisable to allow the returning officer some discretionary power to prolong the time of an election contest under particular circumstances. It might happen that one candidate, by means of having a strong party among the lower orders of voters, of whom there would be under the Bill a large increase, would prevent his opponent's electors being brought up to the poll in due time.
Lord Althorpsaid, the persons who created riots at elections were not generally voters, nor did he see the clause was likely to have the effects apprehended by the hon. Gentleman. He should certainly oppose any additional discretionary power being invested in the returning officer.
Amendment agreed to.
Lord John Russell Lord John Russell moved, that in clause 49 the words "public notice in writing"
38
be substituted for the words "public notice."—Agreed to.
The next was clause 50: on its being read,
Lord Althorpsaid, that acting upon the suggestion of an hon. relative of his, he would propose the introduction of a provision into this clause to enable returning officers to hire houses for the purpose of taking the poll instead of erecting booths, if they should so think fit, such houses to be liable to all the regulations which applied to booths under similar circumstances.—An Amendment to that effect was accordingly proposed.
Mr. John Campbellsaid, he very much approved of the provision proposed, but he would suggest some other word than "hiring" should be introduced, because it would be more convenient if Courthouses, and other buildings of that description, could be made available for the purpose of holding elections.—Agreed to.
Mr. Baringsaid, he would suggest some alteration should be made in the 51st clause: it enacted, that a person proposing a candidate should be liable to all the expense of proposing such candidate. No expense was incurred by the simple act of proposing a candidate. He thought, therefore, it would be an improvement in the clause, that it made a person liable only if he called for a poll, after proposing a candidate.
Lord Althorp, the suggestion of the hon. Gentleman, would leave the case precisely as it stood at present. Under the existing system, if a person proposed and then polled for a candidate, unknown to the Sheriff in his official capacity, such person was not liable to all the expenses incurred. This had been often taken advantage of for the purpose of prolonging an election, which it was one of the objects of the Bill to prevent; he (Lord Althorp) was therefore of opinion, the most effectual way to put an end to this system was, to let such persons know they would be saddled with the expenditure incurred.
Mr. Thomas Duncombe Mr. Thomas Duncombe rose to bring forward the Amendment of which he had given notice, for transferring the borough of Aldborough, in Yorkshire, from schedule B to schedule A, and thereby depriving it altogether of the right of returning a Member to Parliament. He should not, he said, persist in this Motion if he for a moment thought that it was opposed to the principle of this schedule, which had

39
attracted more of the public admiration than any other part of the Bill or if he did not consider that such an amendment was in strict conformity with the general principles of the Bill. As a Reformer he could not permit such a blemish on the Representation of the country as this Aldborough was, to exist, but he would endeavour, if he could, to remove it. In the first Reform Bill which had been introduced by Ministers, Aid-borough stood at the head of schedule A. It was afterwards, however, transferred to schedule B, but upon what representation, or rather misrepresentation, his Majesty's Ministers had been induced to take such a step, he could not say. He should, at all events, like to know who the physician was by whom such a miraculous change had been effected in old Aldborough's constitution. The population of Borough bridge, which joined Aldborough, amounted to 900; that of Aldborough itself to 400; making a total population of men, women, and children of 1,300. The other places which were included in order to raise the population of Aldborough beyond the line of 2,000, had no connexion at all with that insignificant borough. It was true that Borough bridge was a tolerably decent place. It could boast of a good inn, a coal-yard, a timber-yard, and a resident apothecary. It as also a market-town, and there was a fair, too, held there, which was famous for the riotous and drunken scenes enacted at it— principally caused, he must say, by the Scotchmen who came there. If the constituents in Borough-bridge and Aldborough were entitled to retain the franchise, why not incorporate them with Ripon? or he would say, let them give this Aldborough Member to Doncaster, by which means they would not deprive the county of York of a Member. Boroughbridge and Aldborough had been too long a disgrace to the Representative system of this country. What use was there in allowing this borough to remain, unless it was, like some houses of ill-fame left standing in Vienna, to be as a memorial of former corruption? The Duke of Newcastle, or the family of Lawson, would still retain the power of nomination. He did not mean any reflection upon that noble Duke, for there was not living a more high-minded, a more noble, a more generous character, Long might he enjoy that character; but if he wished to increase and preserve it, it was not by infringing on those right
40
which properly belonged to the people of England. He could not expect that his Motion would be supported by Anti-reformers, or by sham Reformers; but in justice to Old Sarum, in justice to Gatton, be required the extinction of Aldborough, that Old Sarum of the North. He hoped upon this occasion Ministers would not join the ranks of the Opposition. They would then, indeed, be in bad company. Let them at least act on the same principle as they did in their foreign policy—on the principle of non-intervention. Let them leave the matter between the real Reformers on his side of the House, and the Anti-reformers on the other, and then, he would answer for the consequence; they should soon be able to give a good account of Aid-borough. What would the Reformers of after-times say, when they learned that in such a measure as this, the borough of Aldborough was allowed to stand, the very prototype of insignificance and corruption. The hon. Member concluded by proposing his Amendment.
Sir William Ingilbyseconded the Motion. He was well acquainted with Aid-borough, and could declare that each succeeding election there, would be nothing more than a contest between the two families of Lawson and Newcastle, and he had the means of knowing, that the inhabitants were so well convinced of this fact, that they would prefer not to send a Member to the House. When boroughs were to be disfranchised on the ground of nomination, he could see no possible reason why Aldborough should escape, and be left as a bone of contention between two families.
Lord John Russellwould put this case simply on these grounds. His Majesty's Ministers had, in framing this schedule, adopted a well-known rule, and as that rule excluded from this schedule all boroughs which had more than 2,000 inhabitants, this borough obtained the benefit of that exception. It was true, that Aldborough in the first instance stood in schedule A, but it having been subsequently represented to Ministers that by adding the borough and the parish together, the population would amount to more than 2,000, and they having found, on consulting the population returns, that that representation was correct, Aldborough was excluded from schedule A, and transferred to schedule B. Beyond that statement he had little to say why Aldborough should

41
not be included in this schedule. He did not think that his hon. friend had made a sufficiently precise or accurate statement, such as would warrant the House in coming to the conclusion, that in this borough, in the parish, and in the immediate neighbourhood, there was not a sufficient number of 10 l. householders to entitle it to send one Member to Parliament. Wishing to preserve as nearly as possible the principle of the Bill as originally brought forward, arid thinking it better that they should avoid departing from that rule which had been laid down and acted upon in making out those schedules, he should feel it his duty to oppose the Amendment proposed by his hon. friend.
Mr. Fynes Clintonhad no personal interest in the question. The interest in the borough would be so altered by this Bill that he could not hope to be ever again returned for it. The inhabitants of Aldborough would much prefer remaining in schedule A; and he was surprised when he heard it was placed in schedule B. The change was not made in consequence of any representations from him or his friends. It was another proof of the many anomalies and absurdities of the Bill, for there were many places exactly in the same predicament.
Lord Morpethdid not feel much interested one way or the other, but there were two reasons why it should remain in schedule B; first, because it was situated in an important district of the county; and, secondly, because it came within the line of 2,000 inhabitants. He had not so much knowledge of the vicinity as his hon. friend (Mr. Duncombe) collected from his contiguous residence; but he believed Milly belonged to Aldborough, for an antiquarian friend informed him that Milly derived its name from the circumstance of being mille passuum de Burgo. He should certainly prefer having the Member given to Doncaster or Barnsley, but as Aldborough came within the line it was better not to re-open the case, quieta non movere.
Sir Charles Wetherellsaid, he was out of the scrape. Though the hon. Member who made the Motion, in the course of his speech seemed often to throw a longing lingering look at him, he could assure him that he had no concern with Aldborough. He must express his thanks to the hon. Member for the language he made use pf upon this occasion, in reference to an
42
illustrious individual, the Duke of Newcastle. Whatever might have fallen from the member for Hertford before, in the heat, perhaps, of debate, he now spoke of that illustrious person in terms descriptive of his true character—of his generous, disinterested, noble, and independent character. From whatever quarter representations might have been made to place Aldborough in schedule B, they certainly did not proceed from that eminent person. By the arrangements of this Bill, the interest of that noble Duke in Aldborough would be completely swamped, as one right hon. Gentleman expressed it, or sluiced, as it had been expressed by another. For his part, he had no more chance than the member for Hertford himself of being returned for Aldborough, and perhaps less; for if the voters heard the able and humorous speech of the hon. Member, it must prove a powerful recommendation to their support. If those infectious diseases which the hon. Member imported from Vienna, should be communicated to Aldborough, there was no fear that he would catch them, for he did not mean to go there, not even within the mille passus of the noble Lord. That noble Lord (Morpeth) said he would vote for retaining Aldborough in schedule B, though he gave no convincing reasons for it; he did not even come within his own mille passus of any reason that would not equally apply to other places. They heard much of corrupt Aldborough, but never heard any thing of corrupt Tavistock, of corrupt Knaresborough, of corrupt Calne, or Ripon, or Horsham. Why not speak of the Duke of Devonshire's boroughs, of the Duke of Norfolk's, of the Marquis of Lansdown's, as well as the Duke of Newcastle's. The former were never mentioned, while the name of the illustrious individual to whom the member for Hertford so justly attributed so many eminent' qualities, was bandied about, and vilely traduced in the scurrilous publications of the day. What reason was there for this? No other reason but because one was the Duke of Newcastle, and the other the Duke of Devonshire. Though he admitted the force of the hon. Gentleman's arguments, he could not vote with him; and for this reason, because he could not vote for the disfranchisement of any place. It belonged to those who prepared the Bill, and not to him, to vindicate their own principle, and to show why Aldborough should be represented, while many large

43
places in Yorkshire remained unrepresented. It was a second edition of the Bill; it was disgraceful altogether, and he would not disfranchise Aldborough.
Mr. Henry Lytton Bulwersaid, that after what they had heard from the hon. member for Hertford, and according to the principles of the Bill, no place could more properly come within the line of disfranchisement than Aldborough. He begged to be permitted to ask, if large commercial towns in the immediate vicinity of such a place, would be satisfied to find themselves excluded from all representation, while Aldborough was retained in schedule B. He was, therefore, willing to see such a blot removed and would support the Motion of his hon. friend.
Mr. Crokermust declare, that according as he understood the principle laid down in the Bill, Aldborough, even with the townships that had been added to it, was not a place which came within that principle. At the same time, he could not vote with the hon. Member, as he could never consent to the disfranchisement of any borough on principles so wild and vague as those of the present measure. Neither could he vote against him, for that would have the effect of placing it in schedule B. He was not disposed to place it in either schedule.
Sir John Johnstonemerely desired to remark upon one allusion of the hon. and learned Gentleman, who had compared the Duke of Newcastle with other noble Dukes; but there was this difference between them, the latter were most anxious for the Reform Bill, while the former, who, he was ready to admit, was a most honourable man, was against it.
The House divided on the Motion:— Ayes 64; Noes 149; —Majority 85.

List of the AYES.

Acheson, Lord

Easthope, J.

Barratt, J. C.

Etwall, R.

Biddulph, M.

Evans, Colonel

Blamire, W.

Ewart, W.

Burton, H.

Ferguson, Sir R.

Bulwer, H. L,

Grattan, H.

Buller, J.

Grattan, J.

Bouverie, Hon. P. P.

Harvey, D. W.

Campbell, J.

Hughes, H.

Clive, H.

Hutchinson, J. H.

Currie, J.

Jephson, C. D, O.

Chandos, Marquis

Jerningham, Hon. H.

Cradock, Colonel

Labouchere, H.

Denison, W. J.

Lefevre, C. S.

Dundas, Hon. J. C,

Lennox, Lord G.

Dundas, Hon. T.

Lennox, Lord A,

44

Lester, B. L.

Smith, M.

Martin, J.

Stanhope, Captain

Milbank, M.

Stewart, Lord J.

Mills, J.

Strutt, E.

Moreton, Hon. H.

Tomes, J.

Ossory, Lord

Troubridge, Captain

Paget, T.

Vincent, Sir F.

Phillipps, C. M.

Watson, Hon. R.

Price, P.

Wason, R.

Protheroe, E,.

Wilbraham, G.

Ramsbottom, J.

Williamson, Sir H.

Rickford, W.

Westenra, Hon. H.

Rochfort, G.

Williams, Sir J.

Robinson, Sir G.

Wilks, J.

Ruthven, E. S.

TELLERS.

Rider, T.

Ingilby, Sir W.

Smith, J. A.

Duncombe, T.

The Marquis of Chandossaid, it was notorious that the seats for the borough of Evesham (Worcestershire), had been for years past sold, and that it was utterly unworthy to return Members to Parliament. He therefore begged leave to move, that the borough of Evesham be inserted in schedule A.
Lord John Russellhad no intention to deny that Evesham had been a corrupt place, but the inquiry which the noble Lord proposed to institute last year, had not taken place, and as the borough did not fall within the rule they had laid down, they could not look at its alleged corruption.
Sir Charles Wetherellsaid, it was clear that if the Reform Bill had not intervened, they should most likely have disfranchised this borough after due inquiry; but it was one of the stratagems of the Reformers, when the present sweeping measure was introduced, to put a stop to all gradual Reform. He was of opinion that they could not disfranchise this borough without going through the same forms as if it were pure. He therefore hoped his noble friend would not press his Motion.
Mr. Burgesaid, a Committee of the House had reported this borough to be corrupt, and that was a ground of Reform on which they ought to proceed. He was opposed to disfranchisement as practised by this Bill, but he could vote for the Motion on grounds previously sanctioned by Parliament.
Sir George Warrendersaid, it was perfectly true that a Committee had reported that the borough was corrupt, but there was no proof that the majority of the electors were corrupt, and in the cases of Aylesbury, Shoreham, and East Ret ford, the House was most anxious to establish, that

45
the majority of electors had been bribed before they proceeded to disfranchise these boroughs. He was himself an elector of that place, and there were many other gentlemen of the vicinity in the same situation. He presumed it would not be said they were corrupt. It was, therefore, a little too much to deprive Evesham of its franchise in a summary manner, when, by the principle under which they had acted, it ought to lose but one Member. He had opposed every clause for disfranchisement in this Bill, and intended to do so as to this Motion.
Mr. John Campbellsaid, if the inquiry into the case of Evesham had been carried on, he had no doubt the borough would have been proved to have been most corrupt. However, he must oppose the Motion, as that would be disfranchising without evidence. In the cases of Shoreham, Cricklade, &c, the examination of witnesses took place at the Bar, after the Report of the Committee had been received, and it was after a verdict of Guilty given in that and the other House of Parliament, that disfranchisement took place, but here the noble Marquis wished them to condemn without any trial whatever.
Mr. Goulburnsaid, after the manner in which the noble Marquis was foiled last year, it was reasonable and natural that he should bring forward his present Motion, though he could not concur with the noble Marquis for the reason that had been given by his hon. and learned friend. But it was somewhat remarkable, that had the noble Marquis succeeded against the place last year, the consequence would have been, that Evesham would have, by including the surrounding hundreds, had two Members instead of one, in the same manner as the other boroughs disfranchised under similar circumstances.
Lord Eastnorobserved, the Bill before them would effect an entire change in the constituency, so that the punishment would not fall upon the guilty old constituency, but upon the new one which was about to be created, and which at present was wholly innocent of the charge of corruption.
The Marquis of Chandosthought there could be but one opinion as to the corruption of Evesham, after all the information which had been laid before the House; and he therefore thought, they would be fully justified in punishing that borough in the proposed manner. However,
46
as many of his hon. friends appeared to hold different opinions, he would not trouble the House to divide upon his Motion, although he could not help remarking, that Ministers must have the credit of saving as corrupt a borough as any in the country.
The question, "that the borough of Evesham be inserted in schedule A", negatived.
Mr. Crokersaid, after the division which had just taken place with regard to Aldborough, which had retained its station in schedule B, he could not doubt that the House would extend the same favour to the borough of Downton. Aldborough had been, by a great majority, preserved, because it passed the line of 2,000 by about 150; now Downton passed the line by 1,500, and he could not imagine why, by the application of the self same rule, Downton was not to be preserved. He begged leave therefore to move, that Downton be removed from schedule A to schedule B.
Lord Althorpsaid, the case of this borough had been so fully argued in the Committee, that there could be no necessity for him to again go over the same ground. Downton was a decayed and inconsiderable place, and had no right whatever to continue to be represented.
An Hon. Membersaid, he knew the place, and although it was a perfect matter of indifference to him in which schedule it was placed, yet he felt bound to declare, that it was not so insignificant a place as the description of the noble Lord might lead the House to suppose.
The question that Downton, Wilts, be placed in schedule B, was put, and the House divided—Ayes 43; Noes 96—Majority 53.
Mr. Crokertrusted the noble Lord would be content for that night. The divisions that had taken place with regard to Aldborough and Downton, rendered it imperative on him to take the sense of the House in the case of St. Germain's.
Mr. Goulburnhoped the hon. and learned Gentleman (the Attorney General) would prepare the clause of which he had given notice as soon as possible, as it was most desirable the Bill should appear as it was intended to stand without any further delay, as the third reading was said to be so near at hand.
Further consideration of the Report adjourned till next day.

MINUTES.
New Peers, Baron CHAWORTH, Baron HOWDEN, Baron KENLIS, and Baron OAKLEY, newly-created Peers, took the Oaths.
Petition presented. By the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, from the Owners of Cabriolets, against a part of the Hackney Coach Act Amendment Bill.

PORTUGAL.
Earl Greysaid, that he rose in consequence of the question that had been put to him on a former evening, relative to papers connected with Portugal, to inform the noble Marquis who put those questions, that the papers were in a state of forwardness, and that they should shortly be laid on the Table of the House. He had also to inform the noble Marquis, that he had inquired into the propriety of laying on the Table the opinion of the King's Advocate on the case on which that opinion was founded, respecting the abduction of the Portuguese fleet from the Tagus, and he had found, that the practice was, not to make such documents public; and though, in Lord Sidmouth's Administration, the opinions of the then Attorney and Solicitor General were produced in order to bear out a particular act of his Majesty's Government, it was not customary to consider communications between the Crown and its law advisers as otherwise than strictly confidential. Instead of its being the rule to submit those papers,
2
he believed the rule was the contrary, and he had only to refer to the remarkable case of Terceira, when the noble Duke lately at the head of his Majesty's Government refused to produce the law opinions on which he and his colleagues acted. When, therefore, the noble Marquis put the question for the production of those papers, he said, though personally he had no objection to lay them before the House, he was not at liberty to do so until he had communicated with the King's Advocate, and procured his consent. That learned person had declared, that he had no objection to have his opinion made public, provided the case on which he gave it was, at the same time laid open. As, therefore there was no difficulty on the part of the King's Advocate, the papers should be at once produced; but he begged the House to remark, that this indulgence was granted under particular circumstances, and that it should be looked upon as an exception from the general rule, and not as a precedent which was to be binding in future cases.
The Earl of Eldonsaid, that the rule had been correctly stated by the noble Earl, and it was unquestionable that the opinions of the law officers of the Crown were altogether confidential between them and the existing Administration. He remembered the time when Sir Fletcher Norton's opinion was made public, and when that

3
learned person declared, that he would never give another opinion in writing. He agreed with the noble Earl both in the propriety of what he stated, and in the course he had pursued in this matter.
The Marquis of Londonderrywas grateful to the noble Earl for laying the opinion before their Lordships, and particularly for his intention to submit the case on which the opinion was founded; and he was the more grateful to him for this information, as there were many parts of his conduct respecting Portugal which he was any thing but satisfied with. He regretted that the noble Earl should still persevere in his unkindly policy towards that country, as the noble Earl ought to be convinced, as he was, by the united acknowledgment of the nobility, clergy, and people, that Miguel was entitled to the throne, and that it was full time for this country to acknowledge his right, and to re-establish its commercial relations with Portugal. And he still more regretted that, during the late Administration, the noble Earl near him, who now admitted the clearness of Don Miguel's right, had not then thought proper to advise his Majesty to recognise him. He was grateful, however, to the noble Earl for the production of these papers, for he hoped that a case would come out of them which would clear the character of the country from a most disgraceful and discreditable stain, which, in his opinion, it acquired by allowing the French fleet to carry off, as prizes, the whole of the Portuguese fleet, and to conduct them to the port of Brest, where they were probably to be re-manned, and to be sent back to Lisbon with the enemies of the existing government, to attempt to overthrow and destroy it, and establish another, in defiance of the wishes of the Portuguese people. He must repeat his thanks for the papers which were promised. When they were in their Lordships' possession, and all the particulars of the transaction fully known, it would be necessary to discuss the subject in all its bearings. And he begged to assure the noble Marquis (Lansdown), who had on a former occasion taunted him by saying, that he had better discuss the subject before the House had the papers, that he felt a deep interest in Portugal. He had served in that country, and he could not forget, nor ought the noble Duke opposite (Richmond) to forget, the fortitude, bravery,
4
and fidelity shewn by the Miguelite party; for it was this party, and not the Constitutionalists, who then rallied round the British flag, and effectually assisted to achieve the independence of their own country and the independence of Europe. It should never be forgotten which of the Portuguese parties it was who fought on the side of Great Britain. There was one question which he begged to put to the noble Earl before he sat down. He had stated the other night, that two line-of-battle ships had been sent to the Tagus, and this fact was now fully confirmed. He wished, therefore, to know if any fresh grievance or new ground of complaint was alleged against the Portuguese government? He asked this question because it was known that an insurrection had recently taken place in Portugal, and had been put down. He was prepared to account for this insurrection. If noble Lords would hear him out, he would state the causes of this insurrection, according to his information, which was perhaps quite as good as any that could be derived from the British Consul at Lisbon. He understood that there were fresh complaints against the Consul. It was stated, that a Serjeant who had been engaged in the revolt, as well as another individual, who had run away, had recently arrived in this country. He wished to be informed if our Consul at Lisbon was authorised to give British passports to individuals so situated? For it was known that the Lisbon packet would not take on board passengers to this country without a British passport. He did not state these facts loosely. Perhaps they might not be included in any information received by the Foreign Secretary. He was nevertheless able, if an opportunity could be afforded him, to prove them by witnesses at their Lordships' bar. Having stated these facts, he now wished to know if any fresh grievance was alleged against the Portuguese government, and if it was such as made it necessary to despatch two line-of-battle ships to the Tagus? He was likewise anxious to know if the letter of Sir John Campbell had been laid before the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. He had received a letter from that noble Lord, acknowledging that which he had sent him; and the last paragraph of the noble Lord's letter to him was such as to warrant one or two remarks. He would read the paragraph, and read also what he

5
had written in reply to it. The noble Secretary said, that it was not necessary for him to reply to the observations of Sir John Campbell, but in justice to Mr. Hoppner, he felt bound to say, that his Majesty's Government had no reason to believe, that the conduct of that gentleman, as his Majesty's Consul at Lisbon, had been other than proper. He would only say, that a letter had been sent to him, and another to Sir Herbert Taylor, by Sir John Campbell, who, as an honourable Officer, was anxious that his Majesty should know, and that the noble Lord at the head of his Government should know, how the national affairs were conducted at Lisbon. The letter addressed to Sir Herbert Taylor was sent back to Sir John Campbell, in order to receive some alterations which it was supposed might make it more agreeable to the noble Earl. This was six weeks ago, and when he found that his Majesty's Government would take no notice of his communication, it was clearly right on the part of the gallant Officer to send his communication to another Member of that House, and to request him to state, that he was ready to prove the allegations it contained. It could not be denied, that the letter had been received by his Majesty's Government, or why did the noble Duke ask him if his letter did not contain some statements respecting the persons in prison in Portugal, which it did not, and which could only have been suspected because the letter to Sir H. Taylor, intended for the information of his Majesty's Government, did contain such a statement? Then it was too much to accuse persons of putting papers into the hands of noble Lords on that side of the House for factious purposes, when a month before, the papers to the same effect had been communicated by the same party to Government. It was possible the Foreign Secretary might know nothing of the letter of Sir John Campbell. It was possible that the noble Earl might have sent him the customary red box, forgetting to put the letter into it, as it was possible that the noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs might have received the letter, and, as in the case of another celebrated letter, might have forgotten to read it. All this was possible, but he knew that the honourable individual sent the letter to his Majesty's Government. Sir John Campbell felt deeply interested in the
6
welfare of Portugal; and finding that his communication obtained no attention from Government, he very naturally applied to a brother soldier, and requested him to bring the conduct of Mr. Hoppner under the notice of their Lordships. He would now state to their Lordships what he had written in reply to the noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs:—"In reply to that part of your Lordship's letter in which you express the opinion that I am mistaken, and that his Majesty's Government have no reason to believe that the conduct of Mr. Hoppner has been other than proper, I can only say, that Sir John Campbell communicated the same statement which I transmitted to you to Sir Herbert Taylor, to be seen by Earl Grey, thus acting in unison with the advice subsequently given by the Duke of Richmond in the House of Lords. The letter was certainly received, for allusion was made to a passage in it respecting prisoners in the course of the debate. I am therefore convinced, that his Majesty's Government were cognizant of the facts stated in the letter I communicated to you, although your Lordship alone might probably have remained unacquainted with them." This was what he had thought fit to reply to the noble Secretary, for he should never permit, without contradiction, any Minister to say that he was mistaken, or to accuse him of stating what was not warranted. These were not the times in which men could be indifferent to such accusations. He begged leave, before he sat down, to repeat his questions, whether any fresh grievance was alleged against the government of Portugal, and whether his Majesty's Government were not aware of the facts slated in the letter of Sir John Campbell before he adverted to the authority of that Officer in the recent discussion?
Earl Greysaid, that the noble Marquis seemed extremely indignant at the possibility of any one imputing a mistake to him, and he supposed, therefore, that he must congratulate the noble Marquis on being free from the common infirmities of nature, to which all other men were liable. He would, therefore, be cautious how he charged him with being mistaken, as it would appear that the noble Marquis was exempt from the common failings of man, and endowed with an excellence of understanding which few could arrogate to themselves. Whether the noble Marquis

7
was right or wrong in that intimation was no business of his, and all he had to say was, that he had no objection to answer his question. He would admit then, that he had seen the letter alluded to, but in the shape of a private communication from Sir Herbert Taylor. He begged, however, to have it understood, that he believed he had not seen it at the period of the debate in which he had been called upon to state his favourable opinions of Mr. Hoppner, so that the letter could not, as the noble Marquis suspected, have induced him to make those remarks, which were altogether drawn from him in justice to that respectable individual. If he had seen the letter previously to that debate, it would have made no difference in what he said; and he was prepared now to say, that the communication of Sir John Campbell had not in the slightest degree weakened his sense of the merits of Mr. Hoppner. There was nothing in the way of reproach towards that gentleman which had been offered, that affected his high opinion of him. He considered the communication as a private one from Sir Herbert Taylor, and he would frankly admit, that the tone and temper in which Sir John Campbell's letter was written, were such that he did not deem it necessary to submit it to his colleagues, and after perusing it himself he returned it to Sir Herbert Taylor. The letter was different, as far as his recollection went, from that "which had been read to the House. There were no specific charges in it, and there was a strong eulogium on the public administration and private virtues of Don Miguel. It was he who suggested to his noble friend (the Duke of Richmond) the question about the persons detained in prison, for he recollected that, after the enumeration of the virtues of Don Miguel, there was a passage which began, "perhaps it might be said, that there were 6,000 persons in prison on account of State accusations." For his part, he believed that 6,000 was not the one-half nor the one-third of those who were then languishing in confinement by order of the Portuguese government; but then the letter went on to ask, "were there not persons confined in the Castle of Ham for the same cause?" and concluded by reasoning of a similar nature, which the House would believe he did not much coincide in, and he therefore allowed the document to escape him without its
8
making any great impression on his mind, and it certainly did not counteract the information which he had received from quarters on which he placed a greater reliance. In the letter read by the noble Marquis, there were specific charges made against the conduct of Mr. Hoppner; but, as he did not believe that Sir John Campbell was present at each particular case, it was clear that he must have got his information from others, by whom he was purposely misled and misinformed. Be that as it might, the letter had been sent to Mr. Hoppner; and when his answer to it was received, the noble Marquis might, if he pleased, renew the subject. So much for this topic—and with regard to the question which the noble Marquis thought proper to put, relative to the sailing of two ships of the line; to that he had only to say, he believed, when orders were given by his Majesty's Government for the departure of ships of war, it was not customary for any person to inquire for what purpose they were sent, and he would, therefore, not give the noble Marquis the information he desired. If the noble Marquis repeated the question to-morrow, and if he continued to repeat it from day to day, all he could say was, that he should have no answer. The noble Marquis then inquired if any new grievance had occurred in Portugal? To that he answered in the affirmative; and not only were complaints made of the government of Don Miguel by the British Consul, but they were made by the Officers of the British ships in the Tagus; and not only by them, but by the merchants of Lisbon and Oporto. The noble Marquis doubted this, but he recommended him to look for better information than he had already proved he was in the habit of receiving, if he wished to support his character of never being mistaken. Notwithstanding those pretensions, it was possible that the noble Marquis might be in error, and he had a late instance which might convince him of the fact. The noble Marquis had then stated, that when the French ships were in the Tagus, they were delayed there for the purpose of forcing the Portuguese government to comply with stipulations of a nature favourable to French commerce; but, when our Minister at Paris was made acquainted with the statement, his answer was, that it was with the greatest surprise that he heard of it, for no such thing was contemplated or attempted.

9
This, to be sure, was a slight error, but it only showed that persons of the greatest power of mind were sometimes unable to distinguish truth from falsehood; and that the noble Marquis, although he was so irritated at its being supposed that he could be mistaken, was himself sometimes misled.
The Marquis of Londonderry, when he rose to ask a question relative to the public affairs of the country, had no idea that the noble Earl would turn his answer into a personal attack, and he assured the noble Earl, that neither in the eyes of the House nor the country was it consistent with his character and acknowledged talent to indulge in personal allusions, where nothing of the kind had been attempted against him. However, on this occasion he would pass by any observation of that nature in silence; begging the noble Earl to believe that he wished to avoid every thing like personality. While he admitted, however, that he was quite unequal to cope in argument with the noble Earl, he would not be prevented by any remarks, whether personal or otherwise, from discharging his duty as a Member of the House, and of pursuing his inquiries into the conduct of his Majesty's Government. The noble Earl charged him with pressing on a debate before all the papers were laid before the House; but surely the noble Earl could not complain of his unwillingness to receive information, as it must be in the recollection of the House, that he had frequently expressed a strong desire to have the whole case laid open. In the absence of that information he had applied to sources of his own, and he felt that his communications were worthy of credit, however much the noble Earl might undervalue them. With regard to the perfect silence which the noble Earl threatened, he had nothing further to say, than that he would continue to pursue that course which was dictated to him by his conviction, whether he was favoured or not by the notice of the noble Earl. The noble Earl might appear indifferent to the questions that had been put from that side of the House, and to the observations that he and his noble friends near him had made on the policy and conduct of the noble Earl; but he would ask the noble Earl, if the question, which had been put, and the comments that had been made, had not materially changed the course of the negotiatio which his Majesty's Government
10
had been lately pursuing? He would ask the noble Earl, if the observations which had proceeded from that side of the House had not given a tone to his negotiations which never would have been given if he and his noble friends had not stated boldly what the opinions of the country were? Indeed, it was evident to all that the noble Earl had been moved by those hints, and that he was now coming round from his confidence in French magnanimity. He hoped, therefore, as the advice from that side of the House had opened the eyes of the noble Earl to the conduct of France respecting Belgium, he would take advantage of their opinions, and be warned in time of the fate of Portugal. He hoped to see the noble Earl act as if he were aware of what French intrigue was driving at, and not be made a party to a wild attempt to impose a constitution on a people who detested it, and to place Don Pedro on a throne to which he had no right. With these few observations he would conclude, regretting that he had trespassed so long on the time and patience of the House.
Earl Greywas not aware of any personality that he had uttered, and he thought that the noble Marquis had no right to complain, as nothing like a personal attack was intended. But he begged leave to ask the noble Marquis, who seemed so sensitive on this point, if he were not aware of the terms that he himself used; and if he forgot, when he spoke of the conduct of his Majesty's Government on the affairs of the Tagus, that he had called it disgraceful, dishonest, and discreditable to the character of the country? The noble Marquis must be aware, that if he used these expressions they must be replied to, and the more he avoided using them the better; otherwise it would be impossible to carry on the debates of the House, at least so far as he was concerned. The noble Marquis said, that great advantage had arisen to the conduct of the foreign policy of the country by the interlocutory debates which he and other noble Lords near him were in the habit of so often provoking and he called on his Majesty's Government, as they had been saved by following his advice respecting Belgium, to take warning now by his foreboding, and to rescue Portugal from her fate. That the noble Marquis was an able and discreet counsellor he was not disposed to deny, but, judging from the counsel he had of

11
late so repeatedly given, which, if followed, would have had no better effect than that of plunging the country into war, he begged leave to decline attending to him for the future, as he could assure the noble Marquis he had not been influenced by his advice during the past. The noble Marquis had spared no opportunity of using offensive epithets against the French government, and of taunting him with placing his confidence in its assertions. The noble Marquis had embraced every opportunity of inflaming both nations against each other, and, as far as was in his power, of leading them into war. He must, therefore, decline to be influenced by opinions which would be attended with that result. But, as the noble Marquis had said that his Majesty's Government was indebted to his counsel for the settlement of Belgium, it was fit that he should assure him that its conduct had not in the least been influenced by what the noble Marquis had said on any one occasion. The conduct of himself and his colleagues had been guided by different views, and they had steadily pursued their course, uninfluenced by the advice, the charges, or the vituperation of the noble Lord. They had gone on as if he had not spoken. He had no objection to let the noble Marquis congratulate himself upon being the dictator or director of the foreign policy of the country, but he would assure the noble Marquis, that he would pursue the line of his duty as he thought fit, and that he would not be deterred by anything the noble Marquis might say from following the policy which seemed to him wisest and most just. He would further tell the noble Marquis, that there was something in his tone and manner, and his apparent indifference to the continuance of peace and the misery of war, which would induce him, if he found himself agreeing with the noble Marquis, to pause and to reconsider the grounds of his opinions before he ventured to act upon them. More than this he would not say at that time, and he would conclude by repeating, however much the noble Marquis might flatter himself with having advised and directed the present Administration, that anything he had said had had no effect whatever on the minds of the Ministers.
The Marquis of Londonderrysaid, he only wished to add one word, which was to repeat what he had said before, and to recommend to the noble Earl to avoid personality,
12
and not to impute vanity or presumption to him or to any other person who ventured to arraign the conduct of his Government. He never indulged in personality, and had attacked, not the noble Earl himself, but the conduct of his Government, and the foreign policy by which he had hitherto guided his Administration. He therefore felt, that the personality which the noble Earl indulged in was inapplicable to him, and unworthy of the station which the noble Earl held in the country. He would, however, repeat, that the noble Earl, in the change of his policy in the Belgian affair, had followed the suggestion which came from that side of the House, and had listened to the advice of the four Powers against France. He had fallen back upon the principles of the quadruple alliance, and felt, at length, the propriety of checking the aggrandisement of France. It was evident that he did so in rescuing Belgium from the clutches of that country, and he only regretted that the Ministers of Prussia and Austria, who had influenced him so strongly on that point, had not urged him with the same success to render justice to Portugal.
The Lord Chancellorthought, with the noble Marquis that this was a most unfit mode of their Lordships passing their time, and he agreed with that noble Lord that it was most idle for the House to occupy itself in what he called interlocutory discussion. The noble Marquis found out that to-night, but he discovered it long ago, and he had not waited for the 14th of September, in the 2nd year of the reign of King William 4th, to learn how many good hours might thus be uselessly consumed. That knowledge had been acquired by him almost the very first day that he was made a Member of that House, and ever since he became acquainted with a certain person to whom he could not more distinctly allude. He would not have said a word on this occasion were he not called on to render justice to an absent, and, as he considered, a very ill-used friend. He always understood, both in this and in the other House of Parliament, when any person was absent, whether friend, enemy, or neutral, that it was but seemly to abstain from making strong accusations against him. This was not the first time, however, that his Majesty's Consul at Lisbon had been attacked in his absence, and he thought it was rather strange that the noble Marquis should be

13
the person to press these charges, as Mr. Hoppner was first advanced by his own relation. But it was evident, that notwithstanding the fact that one so dear to him had selected Mr. Hoppner as worthy of the public confidence, the noble Marquis had suffered his mind to be influenced, to be imposed upon, and to be deluded. It was evident that the noble Marquis, however honestly he meant, was deluded by artful parties, and knowing nothing personally of those transactions, he was made the dupe or agent of persons who induced him to speak of Mr. Hoppner in terms which were pretty much the same as Don Miguel himself would speak of that individual. No one would question the honour of Sir John Campbell, but it should be recollected that that gallant Officer was in the way of being acted upon by strong prejudices, and his situation in the country rendered him liable to be affected by them; and as there was no doubt that he was full of Miguelite prejudices, he had communicated them to the noble Marquis, who had swallowed them up and absorbed them into his system. The noble Marquis, therefore, only saw one side of the question, and he viewed with jaundiced eye every thing that concerned that country, or the conduct of his Majesty's Government towards it. For his own part, judging of the letter of Sir John Campbell, and the discretion in which it was conceived, and the language in which it was expressed—nay, of the manner in which it was directed, he thought it was but prudent to pause before he gave a full assent to all that it contained. From it, however, he learned, that Sir John Campbell was angry with Mr. Hoppner, because Mr. Hoppner was angry with Don Miguel, and because that gentleman had taken steps—mind you, in the discharge of his duty—to protect his own countrymen from the attacks which were made or threatened against them. Sir John Campbell admitted, that there were probably 6,000 persons shut up in prisons, and then he innocently asked, whose fault was that? And was it not clear that they had acted in the same manner as the Prince de Polignac and the other French ministers, who were shut up in the fortress of Ham? Sir John Campbell totally forgot to say, that the latter were accused, tried, convicted, and that their imprisonment was the consequence of their crime and a legal sentence, pronounced by the tribunals of
14
the country. Sir John Campbell spoke of 6,000 persons only; if he had named 30,000 he would have been nearer the mark—all of whom were untried, unconvicted, not sentenced—many of whom were taken out of their beds in the dead of the night, and more of whom were arrested in mid-day, without naming the offence of which they were accused. He should not be surprised if ninety-nine out of every hundred were languishing in Don Miguel's dungeons without a regular accusation, trial, or sentence. Were these the attractions which won the regards of Sir John Campbell and the noble Marquis, and by which they were able to account for the love they bore to Don Miguel? He really could not account for the desire which the noble Marquis, and an hon. Baronet in the other House of Parliament, on all occasions evinced to support Don Miguel; and the soreness which they exhibited when the conduct of that personage was arraigned; he himself knew what party was. He
—"had given suck (to faction), and knew
How tender 'tis to love the babe;"—
but he would
"Have plucked the nipple from its gums And dashed the brains out,"
sooner than he would have let his party beguile him to be
"Pleased with a rattle—tickled with a straw,"
and descend to the praise of Don Miguel. He could abstain from speaking of Don Miguel at all; but if he did say any thing, he would speak of him in the words of one who knew how to paint a tyrant to the life:—"Tyrannus, quo neque tætrius, neque fædius, nee dis hominibusque invisius animal ullum cogitari potest: qui, quanquam figura est hominis, morum tamen immanitate vastissimas vincit belluas." Praise him, indeed, or any one of his caste! No, that was beyond his power. He never could descend to that, though he gave way to the bitterest feelings that ever were engendered by faction or sprung from party. With regard to the charge of using personalities, which the noble Marquis made against his noble friend, it appeared to him very odd that the noble Marquis should be so unconscious of the pain which he himself inflicted, and so much alive to that which he experienced. Not that he thought the noble Earl had shown any thing like a proper sense of the castigation of the noble Marquis; he had

15
not evinced enough for the order of debate, or as much as such cutting words in decency called on him to do. The noble Earl could not be so patient under the rod, and it was but fitting that he should chafe a little, and not take in such good part the bitter things which were levelled against him. Considering the severity of the noble Marquis, and that he had said nothing more than that the noble Earl's Administration had disgraced the Sovereign and the country, it was wonderful to find him so patient, and, he would add, forgiving—
The Marquis of Londonderry: It was quite true.
The Lord Chancellor: The noble Marquis said, "quite true." He supposed that was by way of making his charge less disagreeable. The noble Marquis then proceeded to say, that all the wise measures of late pursued by his Majesty's Government had been forced upon them by his advice, and that all the good that had accrued to them had been received at his hands. It might be true, but he did not know until now to what mighty spirit they had been indebted.
"Spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa, per artus
Mens agitat molem, et magno si corpore miscet."
He was not aware until now, that it was the noble Marquis who bade the spirit speak which agitated their minds and impelled their measures. The noble Marquis did not seem, however, to be informed of what the real effect of all that he had been saying was. He would be surprised to be told, that it was a more serious thing than he could imagine; and he could bear testimony to all the remonstrances which the noble Earl offered to him in that course, but in vain. Night after night was the noble Marquis at his post, making speeches against France. Now he (the Lord Chancellor) did not say that England should truckle to France, but he said, we should keep peace with France, for if there was not peace with her, there was nothing but war for the world. When France was peaceably and amicably disposed, he said let England enter into every kindly feeling, though it be with France. He said, with France, and with France above all others, because she was our nearest and greatest neighbour—and she had more power than any other State to disturb the repose of Europe. What he now stated was on something better than surmise—he spoke from the authority he had officially
16
acquired within the last three months; and he cautioned the House against the perilous consequences of these constant and unjust charges. Was there a Minister to be attacked, he was accused of a leaning towards France; was the Government in mass to be denounced, it was because it sought an alliance with France. If there was one thing for which, in the estimation of the people, a Minister of this country would deserve to lose his head, it would be the needless plunging into a war with France, and involving in one common hostility Europe and the world. That was not known in France—it was not known in the Paris circles—it was not known amongst many, even very well-informed people—it was not known amongst their Statesmen; but they knew the noble Marquis, and, as a prophet was more honoured in another country than in his own, they attended to what he said. They did not know that the noble Marquis was not a person of the greatest weight, influence, and consideration of any one in the House—they knew, however, that he was an important member of an important party—the leading member of the Opposition of this country, and they consequently said, "There is a great war party in England—all the high Tory party, with the noble Marquis at their head, are bent on breaking the peace." The consequence of this was, that many best well-wishers of this country in Europe were at this moment trembling for the peace of Europe in consequence of these repeated attacks. He would not at present bring forward his private opinion; but he had no hesitation in saying, that if these attacks were persisted in, he should use arguments which would convince their Lordships, that he had rather understated than exaggerated the case. "I shall not (continued the noble and learned Lord) have regretted having troubled your Lordships on the present occasion, if what I am about to add shall reach France, and the friends and well-wishers of this country, and the friends and well-wishers of peace in that great nation (for they are the same persons, and one and the same party—they who wish well to England, France, and the peace of Europe, are one and the same); if the contradiction which I now give in the face of your Lordships and the country shall reach them, and carry comfort to their bosoms, I shall not regret having troubled your Lordships. I solemnly and in my conscience

17
believe, that the breaking the peace of Europe will, over England, Ireland, and Scotland, be the most hated act that any Government could be guilty of; that it would draw down universal, loud, and unsparing execrations on the Government; and I do in my conscience believe, that those execrations would not be more loud, universal, and unsparing, than, according to the soundest view of the interests of this country, and the honour of the Crown which I serve, and which I think I more faithfully serve the more I give utterance to these opinions, they would be merited by the advisers of so insane and criminal a course."
The Marquis of Londonderrywould not be deterred by all the eloquence and all the power of language possessed by the noble and learned Lord from doing his duty. He did think that the efforts of the noble and learned Lord had failed, when he ventured forth, with all his power and all his extraordinary language, to heap on the Prince who was now reigning over Portugal all the abuse which he seemed to think him deserving of. That individual had not been proved to be guilty, and he ought to be considered innocent until he was so proved. He did not stand up to defend Don Miguel, but when there were statements on one side and on the other, he did object to the condemnation of that individual until both sides were examined. Of this there could be no doubt, that Don Miguel was the acknowledged King of Portugal, however noble Lords might quarrel with his title. He did not pretend to be such a scholar as the noble and learned Lord; he could not quote with so much facility as the noble and learned Lord did. He could only compare the noble and learned Lord to Cæsar,
"He doth bestride this narrow world
Like a Colossus, and we petty men
Walk under his huge legs and peep about
To find ourselves dishonourable graves."
Should they not endeavour, then, to put him down, who did all he could to get them under by the extraordinary lash of his eloquence? He believed that the noble and learned Lord was brought to that House for the purpose of assisting those who, when questioned, wished to be silent. No sooner was a question asked, than the noble and learned Lord started up, and took his position on the Opposition side of the House, for the purpose of—
Lord Holland Lord Holland rose to order. The assertion of the noble Marquis, that the noble and learned Lord was sent to that House for some certain purpose, was extremely irregular. It would be well if the noble Marquis would check the profusion and ardour of his eloquence, which led him into assertions that were not at all reconcileable with order.
The Marquis of Londonderrysaid, no man felt a greater wish to pay personal respect to every member of that House than he did. But he must say, that courtesy was not always observed towards him. He well recollected the observation made by the noble and learned Lord about braying his head in a mortar. Had the noble Baron called the noble and learned Lord to order on that occasion, he thought that he would have been justified in doing so. But did any noble Lord imagine, that when the noble and learned Lord had attacked him as he had done, he would not attempt to answer it? With respect to the remark which had been made on him, he would say, that he thought it would be a great blessing to the Constitution if the noble and learned Lord would allow himself to be brayed in a mortar first? He would ask of any noble Lord, whether the whole course of the noble and learned Lord's speech was not decidedly personal? He should say little more at present, but he would take other opportunities to answer what had been said by the noble and learned Lord as to our relations with Portugal and France. He had never, although the noble and learned Lord had asserted it, wished for a war with France. Let the noble and learned Lord prove the contrary, by any thing which he had said or done in that House. But he would assert, that the Government of this country, in the negotiations which had been carried on up to this time, had shown a truckling spirit—a fear of supporting this country's old ally, on account of our situation with France. He had alluded to the conduct of France, in robbing Portugal of her fleet, as a circumstance the most disgraceful that had ever been permitted by any Administration of this country; and that he would prove, when the proper time arrived. He could assure the noble and learned Lord, that he would not return to these personal attacks, unless the noble Lord provoked him, by endeavouring to put him down. He felt no desire to make personal attacks;

19
but at the same time he was little disposed to put up with them.
The matter terminated here.