Sitting of 30 May 1839

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a first time:—Electors Removal.—Read a second time:—Custody of Infants.
Petitions presented. By Sir Robert Peel, Messrs. Wallace, Brotherton, and a great many other hon. Members, from an immense number of places, in favour of a Uniform Penny Postage.—By Messrs. Freshfield, Hodges, Greene, Packe, Hogg, Colquhoun, Palmer, Baines, Brocklehurst, Pease, Brotherton, W. E. Gladstone, Pakington, C. Wood, Chapman, Broadley, Christopher, Turner, Heath-cote, Lords Stanley, G. Somerset, Lennox, and Darlington, Sirs C. Styles, C. Lemon, C. Knightley, R. Peel, C. Burrell, G. Strickland, T. D. Acland, R. Inglis, E. Wilmot, Sergeant Jackson, Captain Wood, Colonel Sibthorpe, from an immense number of places, against any plan of National Education not founded on the Principles of the Established Church.

SCOTLAND.—PRINTING THE BIBLE.
Sir James Graham: The patent of the King's printer of the Holy Scriptures in Scotland would expire on the 17th of July. That patent was the sole security for preserving an authentic version of the Scriptures; and as it was not, he understood, the intention of her Majesty's Ministers to renew the patent which was about to expire, the question which he to ask was, whether it was the intention of the Government to take any, and if any, what steps, to prevent interpolations, either through ignorance or design?
Lord J. Russeell: Her Majesty's Ministers did not intend to renew the patent for the exclusive monopoly of any individual or corporation; and by that course they would be enabled to circulate the Scriptures at the cheapest price. But at the same time that every possible freedom of circulation was secured for them, the Government were resolved to preserve the text of the Scriptures from corruption or interpolation, by means which he should take care to explain to the House on a future day, when the question came on for discussion.
Sir J. Grahamsaid, the patent would

1105
expire on the 17th July, and with it the existing security; and he hoped that the measure would be introduced as speedily as possible.

JAMAICA—SECOND MEASURE.
Mr. Labouclrererose, pursuant to notice, to move for leave to bring in a bill to provide for the enactment of certain laws in Jamaica, consequent upon the abolition of slavery in that island. He had already stated to the House that this bill was introduced as a substitute for the other measure relating to the affairs of that colony which he had had the honour to propose at an earlier period of the Session. He wished—he most sincerely wished—he could state, that he entertained any different opinion of the justice, of the expediency, or of the necessity of passing a measure similar to that which he had previously introduced. Unhappily he was bound to state that after greater reflection, more mature consideration, and more abundant information, he did not withdraw the former measure in consequence of any alteration of the opinions he had previously expressed. If he had done so, he hoped he should not be backward in making the admission; but standing in the position he did, however unworthily representing the Colonial Department in that House, he could not but express his deep regret, that the bill he first introduced did not receive such a measure of support, as could leave any chance of its becoming the law of the land, in such a manner as to be brought into operation in Jamaica with any prospect of attaining useful ends. When he saw that the great party which was ranged opposite had made up their minds in one unbroken phalanx to oppose the bill, he confessed that from that moment he lost much of the anxiety he had previously entertained, because he could not but feel that a measure of this kind, suspending the constitution of a British colony, not only could not pass the Legislature and become a law for any good effect; nay, be would go further and say, it could not have any effect at all even if it were to become a law—if it were to go out to the colony only upon the authority of a small majority of that House. He did not say this with any intention of bringing a charge against the hon. Gentlemen opposite for the course they had thought proper to pursue. But at the same time he was bound to men-
1106
tion it, because he felt, that in discussing this and other colonial topics, if the House were to be guided merely by party feelings, if it were to decide, not upon the merits of the case, so much as upon the effect which the decision might have upon the relative position of parties in that House, no measure could ever be beneficial. He thought he had acquitted himself of all intention of wishing to implicate hon. Gentlemen opposite, by stating that he did not intend to bring any charge of that kind against them; but he thought it his duty to point out to the House the great misfortune of considering these questions in a party spirit. He felt the evil most deeply, and he thought it the more necessary to press it upon the attention of the House, because the colonial affairs of the country were at the present moment in a state of great difficulty. For that reason, if the House had not enough of real public spirit to free its mind from party bias in approaching the consideration of these questions, he felt bound to say, that in his belief the colonial affairs of the country would be placed in circumstances of the utmost peril, in consequence of the general feeling of disgust which would arise in the minds of the colonists, when they found their dearest interests determined upon, not by their real merits, but by the caprice or obstinacy of this or that party. When he said this, he confessed he had fresh in his recollection the events which took place in Canada last year—events which must also be equally fresh in the recollection of the House. In consequence of the proceedings in the British Parliament, an impression obtained ground in the Canadas that circumstances and events of the greatest importance to the welfare and well-being of those provinces were determined upon only by the influence of party feelings in England. Hence the indignation awakened in that part of our possessions was such as to produce a degree of excitement which became highly dangerous. He stated this, not with the view of introducing party politics, but for the purpose of pointing out to the House the very great importance of divesting its mind of those party contentions and party feelings which too frequently disfigured its debates and marred its legislation. The measure which he should now feel it his duty to propose to the House was, he need hardly say, founded upon a very different principle from that which he had previously

1107
introduced; because, after the former decision of the House, the Government could not hope to carry any measure based upon the same principle. The bill he now sought leave to introduce was founded upon the principle of affording means to the Government of calling together again the Legislature of Jamaica—of giving to the House of Assembly of that island that which was called by the right hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) a locus penitentiœ. He could not pretend that he had any very sanguine expectation that the House of Assembly would avail itself of that opportunity; but as a course of this kind was now proposed by the Government, he should certainly take care to use no irritating expressions towards the House of Assembly which might have the effect of marring any disposition they might entertain to alter the course they had previously determined to act upon. And he would also say on the part of the Government, and especially on the part of the Marquess of Normanby, who presided over the Colonial Department; he would pledge himself to the House that if it should accede to the proposal now made—if it should furnish the Government with the means of providing for the good Government of Jamaica, which were contemplated in the bill—in every communication between the Colonial-office and the House of Assembly a most sincere desire would actuate his noble Friend and those who acted with him to give the House of Assembly a fair and bonâ fide trial—to urge upon that body the adoption of those measures only which should be deemed absolutely essential, and to leave to it, if possible, the task of carrying those measures into operation. This was the principle of the scheme he now proposed to introduce—that an opportunity should be given of calling together the House of Assembly of Jamaica, and of asking them to re-consider the determination they had come to of not transacting the business of the colony. It might be said, that the introduction of a bill was not necessary for that purpose. It was, however, very generally allowed by those Gentlemen who most opposed the principle of suspending the constitution, that it was the duty of the Imperial Parliament to provide for the contingency, more or less probable, of the House of Assembly persisting in the resolution it had three times adopted, of abrogating its legislative functions. The bill
1108
which he proposed that night to lay upon the table of the House explained the means by which the Government sought to provide for that contingency. He thought he could not do better, in order to state what were the measures of the most pressing necessity, and the greatest importance to the present welfare of the colony, than read an extract from a resolution of the House of Assembly itself, in which it expresses its regret that it felt itself bound to suspend its legislative functions, and describes the measures to which, if the necessity of suspending its legislative functions had not arisen, it should have felt itself bound to direct its earliest attention. The House of Assembly on the 8th of November,1838, in answer to a speech of the Governor, said—
'We feel in common with your Excellency the emergency in which the country may be placed by the expiration of the annual laws; and we are also well aware of the necessity which in our present state of society exists, that laws for the protection of vagrancy, for regulating the relative rights and duties of masters and servants, for determining the qualification of electors, for the regulation of the militia, and for preventing the unauthorised occupation of land, should be enacted."
The subsequent House of Assembly, in reply to the speech of the Governor on the 24th of December, 1838, said—
"We beg sincerely to assure your Excellency that in deciding upon this course, we have done so with extreme reluctance. We are more than sensible of the many existing evils which loudly call for laws to remedy them."
He could multiply such proofs of the necessity which existed for immediate legislature upon the internal affairs of the colony. He could prove it in a thousand ways from the admissions of the colonists themselves; but the necessity was, in fact, so fully explained and so fully admitted in the former debate upon this question, that he did not feel it necessary again to trouble the House by going into detail upon that point. The first part of the bill he now proposed, referred to those annual laws in Jamaica which had expired in consequence of the House of Assembly refusing to transact business. These were seventeen in number. It was not very easy to judge of the relative importance of each one of them. But at the same time it was only necessary to pass the eye over the list to see that the House of Assembly

1109
was perfectly justified in saying that the suspension or expiration of those laws must necessarily be attended with great inconvenience, great mischief, and, he might add, great danger to the colony. He found amongst them the Commissioners of Public Buildings Act, the Insolvent Debtors Relief Act, the expiration of which would consign many persons to prison, without the possibility of relief; the Process Act, and several others, the expiration of which would retard the course of justice, and be productive of much hardship to individuals. Money bills excepted, perhaps the most important and necessary act for the welfare of the colony was the Police Act. Without that act the authority of the magistrates would be paralyzed, and the security of the laws be taken away. It was true, that in the particular case of the Police Act, the Governor, under an authority which had been given him, had been enabled to take some temporary measure partially to alleviate the evils which must otherwise have arisen. But he thought every one must allow, that it was not a fit state of things in the present state of Jamaica, that the ancient constitutional mode of maintaining the peace of the colony should be abandoned, and a system wholly unconstitutional be introduced instead. It was natural to suppose that such a state of things would produce in the minds of the colonists, and of the negro population especially, a very unfortunate effect. He would select one letter from amongst many which had been placed in his hands, to show how prejudicially the unfortunate suspension of local legislation, and especially the suspension of the Police Act, had operated upon the negro population. Reluctant as he was to trouble the House by a reference to documents, the evils he was anxious to explain were so forcibly pointed out in this letter, that be could not abstain from reading one short extract. It was an extract of a letter from Mr. John Oldham, dated St. Mary's, Jamaica, March 23, 1839, and addressed to Charles Long, Esq.
"During the three weeks I have been in this island (Mr. Oldham had been absent on a visit to this country), I have been endeavouring to gain all the information I can from the several parishes as to the state of things, and I do assure you it is truly deplorable, and will continue so until the business is settled, as to whether we are to have a House of Assembly to make laws, or have them made for us by the
1110
Imperial Parliament. Our annual law expired on the 31st of December last; consequently the police are discharged. The negroes are under the impression that the Queen dispensed with their services to prevent the proprietors calling in their assistance to compel them to pay rent for their houses and provision grounds."
He stated this to show what must be the effect upon a population recently emancipated of exhibiting to them the whole structure of society suddenly altered and disordered, and the authorities at the same time stripped of all the support and assistance which they were usually accustomed to receive. He stated it also to prove how little warrantable it was, to argue that these laws were of little importance, and that it would be safe to leave them to take their chance. Another of these expired laws involved a matter of great importance; but, as he had already observed, it was extremely difficult in this country to know what was the importance of each law in the colony. One thing at least was certain, that both the House of Assembly itself and the Governor completely concurred in saying, that a state of the greatest mischief and confusion to the public would ensue, if these laws were not renewed. Now, the course which it was intended by the present bill to pursue with regard to these expired laws was this—to give in the first place ample time to the House of Assembly to make up their minds whether they would or would not renew these laws; but in case of their refusal, after the lapse of sufficient time, then to authorise the Governor in council to revise such of those expired laws, as to the Governor in council might appear essential to the welfare and good government of the colony. But he confessed he thought the Imperial Parliament would hardly discharge its duty if it stopped there. He thought it must be obvious to every one who had paid any attention to the papers which had been laid upon the table, or who was in any way acquainted with the affairs of Jamaica, that there were some points of legislation of such importance at the present moment—some local measures, so essential to the success of the great experiment in which the nation was now engaged—some new enactments, so absolutely necessary to protect the various interests of the colony during the transition of the negro population from slavery to a state of free labour—some laws, so necessary to secure the complete success of that great experiment, which, he

1111
mightsay, was now trembling in the balance —that the Imperial Parliament would hardly discharge its duty either to the people of Great Britain, who had made so generous a sacrifice, or to the colony itself, if it were not to provide for the contingency of the House of Assembly still refusing to transact business, and to leave the whole of this very important subject entirely undisposed of for the period of another year. For the House must recollect, that unless Parliament should be expressly called together for the purpose in the autumn, the colony, in case of the continued obstinacy of the House of Assembly, would be left entirely without those necessary laws for the space of full twelve months. It had been the object of the Government, in considering this part of the question, to interpose the authority of the Imperial Parliament upon as few points as possible. Upon this branch of the subject, or upon the former, the most ample opportunity would be afforded to the House of Assembly to pass new laws where they were required, and to renew old ones when the circumstances of the case rendered a renewal necessary. And Government would heartily rejoice if the House of Assembly should legislate upon all these topics in such a manner as to relieve the Imperial Parliament from the painful necessity of interfering upon subjects which, in all ordinary times, and under all ordinary circumstances, belonged entirely to the local legislature of the colony. The whole principle of the bill went upon the foundation—that upon this branch of the subject, as upon the other, the whole of the legislation proposed to the Imperial Parliament should be nothing more than contingent legislation. Every opportunity would be given to the House of Assembly to enact all the necessary laws before the present bill came into operation, and he for one should most heartily rejoice if the proceedings of the House of Assembly should prevent its ever coming into operation at all. He thought this perfectly consistent with the language he used, and the course of argument he pursued on the former occasion, when this subject was under the consideration of the House. He then stated that the Imperial Legislature must take one of two courses. It must either express the total distrust (which he had felt it his duty to express) that the House of Assembly would resume its legislative functions, or else
1112
it must treat with that body as with persons who were willing to deal fairly and candidly. He, for one, was disposed to give the House of Assembly fair play; but in his desire to give them fair play, he was anxious to take care that the Imperial Parliament should not abandon its paramount duty, namely, of affording protection to that great mass of the colonial population which was at present totally unrepresented in the House of Assembly. He would now proceed to state to the House the course he proposed to pursue with regard to two or three topics of pressing importance. There were doubtless several others which urgently demanded legislation in Jamaica; but he would confine his observations for the present to those only which were of the most immediate importance. It stood to reason that the laws which applied to the former state of society in the colony could not be made applicable to the altered state of society without a most thorough and searching revision. But he by no means proposed to the House to embark in so great a scheme as that of revising the whole of these laws. He for one had always a great distrust in distant legislation. He had always felt, that although undertaken with the best motives, it was more likely to frustrate the views of those who were really acquainted with the wants of a colony than to effect any permanent good. He was, therefore, anxious to limit the experiment in the present instance to the smallest possible extent, and to apply it only to certain cases in which they had some partial experience. But there were three great subjects which he thought every Gentleman who had paid any attention to West-Indian affairs would allow to be of paramount importance in the present condition of Jamaica. He meant, first, the law relating to vagrancy; secondly, the law relating to contracts for labour; and, thirdly, the law relating to the unauthorised occupation of land. Upon these three subjects orders in council were sent out to the West-India colonies some time ago. Those orders had been in operation in the Crown Colonies for at least five months, and from no one of those colonies had the slightest complaint been received as to the manner in which the orders had worked, nor was there the least reason to believe that they had not been found thoroughly to answer the purposes for which they were intended,

1113
If, therefore, it were safe to pass laws for colonies at a distance from the mother country, he thought that these orders appeared to afford safe and secure grounds for such legislation. At any rate, of this he was quite sure, that laws founded upon those orders would be infinitely better adapted to the altered state of things in the island of Jamaica than were those intolerant statutes that existed there at the present moment. It would be his duty to read portions of those statutes to the House, and he doubted not, that when hon. Members heard that any of her Majesty's subjects were living under laws of such a description, they would agree with him in opinion, that the British House of Commons would be indeed wanting in its duty, and failing in the pledge they had given to the people of England, if they did not immediately take effectual means that such a state of things should no longer continue in Jamaica. The first subject to which he would call the attention of the House was that of vagrancy. This was the manner in which Sir Lionel Smith spoke of the present Jamaica law, in his despatch, dated the 10th September, 1838:—
"I quite dread the consequences. From the attachment of the people to their old locations, they must be reduced to the employer's own terms of wages, or be driven off the properties as vagrants. Then, I beseech your Lordship to look to the provisions of the Local Vagrant Act, unrepealed, 35 Car. 2nd, c. 2. This Act was introduced against the lawless soldiery of Governor D'Oyley; and many violent planters are now rejoicing in the power it gives of flogging free men from parish to parish; and there is an improvement in its penal powers by the 32 Geo. 3rd. c. 11, still unrepealed, which adds six months' hard labour in the House of Correction. Your Lordship may bid me apply to the Legislature to repeal these frightful laws; but I should apply in vain: and in the midst of freedom we have still terrific engines of oppression and tyranny preparing for the emancipated population."
He would now read an extract or two from the law itself, to which he hoped the House would have the goodness to listen, as being now in actual operation in the British Colonies:—
"And be it further enacted, that all rogues, vagabonds, or other idle persons that shall be found wandering from place to place, or otherwise mis-ordering themselves, shall be apprehended by the constables or tythingmen of each respective parish within this island, and
1114
to carry him or her so apprehended, before some one justice of the peace of that precinct; and if, upon examination, it appear that the apprehended be persons fit and able to work, and do refuse so to do, but wander about as aforesaid, then the said justice shall order him or her to be whipped on the naked back, not exceeding thirty-nine lashes in the whole, by the said constable or tythingman, and shall be forthwith sent from parish to parish by the constables or tythingmen of the same, the next straight way to the parish where he or she dwelt for one whole year then last past."
He would also read another clause:—
"Be it enacted, that all white persons and free negroes and mulattoes, able in body, who, not having wherewith otherwise to maintain themselves, use loitering, and refuse to work for the usual and common wages, and all other idle white persons, free negroes, and free mulattoes wandering abroad and begging, (except soldiers, &c. &c.), shall be deemed rogues and vagabonds. And be it further enacted, that if any person, by this act declared to be a rogue and vagabond, shall be found in any parish or place to be wandering or begging, or mis-ordering him or herself, it shall and may be lawful for the constable of such parish, or any other person there dwelling, to apprehend the person so deemed a rogue or vagabond, and to convey, or cause to be conveyed, him or them to some justice of the peace in the parish, or in the neighbourhood of such parish or place."
The fifth clause says:—
"It may and shall be lawful for such justice, and he is hereby required to inform himself, as well by the oath and examination of the person or persons apprehended as of any other persons (which oath or oaths the said justice is hereby authorised to administer), or by any other ways or means he shall think proper, of condition, circumstances, and way of life of the person or persons so apprehended. And if the person comes within the description in this act of a rogue or vagabond, the justice shall send him, her or them, to the parish workhouse, there to be set to work, for any time not exceeding six months for any one offence."
Then came a clause to which he wished to call the particular attention of the House. It was the sixth.
"And be it further enacted, that all white persons committed or sent to the said public workhouse, shall be fed, lodged, and worked separate and apart from the free negroes, mulattoes, and slaves in the said workhouse."
He was quite sure that it would be felt by hon. Gentlemen on both sides of the House that it was utterly unfit and unwise that a law of this kind should remain in existence in the island of Jamaica. He

1115
would now proceed to the second subject to which he had referred—a subject of the utmost importance to the success of the great measure of emancipation which was now going on in the colonies—he meant the law with regard to "contracts for labour." It must be obvious to every Gentleman, that the successful cultivation of the sugar plantations mainly depended on the negro labourer being induced to enter into a contract on such fair terms as should secure to the planter the continuance of his services. If that were not done, every man who understood the nature of the negro character, would at once perceive that sugar cultivation could not, in the long run, be rendered a productive or profitable speculation, and that that great source of employment for British capital would be ultimately dried up, equally to the disadvantage of the planter and to the negro population. There was not, therefore, in his opinion, an object of more pressing importance than that of obtaining for the planters of Jamaica a good and efficient law of contract for labour. He would read a few extracts in order to show what was the present law upon the subject; and when he had done so, the House would not be surprised that there should at this moment exist a very general indisposition on the part of the negro population to engage in any definite contract at all, or that they should be encouraged in this feeling by those who were usually called the friends of the negroes—namely, the religious missionaries—a class of men, who, in his (Mr. Labouchere's) opinion, had on many occasions exercised a very salutary influence over the negro population. He felt it due to that much calumniated body of men to say, that he believed it was mainly owing to their exertions, notwithstanding the unexampled state of things that existed in Jamaica, in consequence of the suspension of the functions of the colonial legislature, that there had been no serious disturbance of the public peace in that island. Considering how often the conduct of those men had been made the subject-matter of blame in that House, he thought that this great fact, which could not be controverted or concealed, ought not to be overlooked. The right hon. Gentleman then read the following copy of a dispatch from Lieutenant-general Sir Lionel Smith, Bart., K.C.B., to Lord Glenelg:—
1116
"King's House, August 14,1838.
"My Lord—I am very anxious to draw your Lordship's attention to the act of the island, 5 William 4th, c. 2, for enlarging the powers of justices in determining complaints between masters and servants, &c.
"This act has already been found to operate with great severity against the European emigrants; and the friends of the negro are naturally apprehensive that it may be converted into a powerful engine of oppression against the labourers, as it gives authority to a single justice to apprehend, under his warrant, servants in husbandry,' who absent themselves or neglect to fulfil their contract, and punish them by hard labour, not exceeding three months, or by forfeiture of wages.
"I hope your Lordship will be enabled to rid us of this act, either by a formal disallowance, or by the authority of the Imperial Parliament."
He would next read the following extract from the Act referred to in the above despatch:—
"And be it further enacted, that if any servant in husbandry, or any mechanic, artificer, handicraftsman, labourer, person employed in droggers, body or house servant, or other person, shall contract with any person or persons whomsoever, to serve him, her, or them, for any time or times whatsoever, or in any other manner, and shall not enter into or commence his or her service, according to his or her contract, or, having entered into such service, shall absent himself or herself from his or her service before the term of his or her contract (whether such contract shall be in writing or not in writing) shall be completed, or neglect to fulfil the same, or be guilty of any other misconduct or misdemeanor in the execution thereof, or otherwise respecting the same, then and in every such case, it shall and may be lawful for any justice of the peace of the parish where such servant in husbandry, mechanic, artificer, handicraftsman, labourer, person employed in droggers, body or house servant, or other person, shall have so contracted, or be employed, or be found; and such justice is hereby authorized and empowered, upon complaint thereof made upon oath to him by the person or persons, with whom such servant in husbandry, mechanic, artificer, handicraftsman, person employed in droggers, labourer, body or house servant, or other person, shall have so contracted, or by his, her, or their attorney, manager, or agent, which oath such justice is hereby empowered to administer, to issue his warrant for the apprehending every such servant in husbandry, mechanic, artificer, handicraftsman, person employed in droggers, labourer, body or house servant, or other person, and to examine into the nature of the complaint; and if it shall appear to such justice, that any servant in husbandry, mechanic, artificer, handicraftsman, persons employed in droggers, labourer, body or house servant, or

1117
other person, shall not have fulfilled such contract, or bath been guilty of any other misconduct or misdemeanor, as aforesaid, it shall and may he lawful for such justice to commit every such person to the house of correction, there to remain and be held to hard labour for a reasonable time, not exceeding three months, and to abate a proportionable part of his or her wages for and during such period as he or she shall be so confined in the house of correction; or, in lieu thereof, to punish the offender by abating the whole, or any part of Ids or her wages."
Now, when hon. Gentlemen recollected the peculiar relation in which the magistrates of the island of Jamaica, who were in fact the master-planters themselves, stood in regard to the labouring population there, he would ask, whether this was a fit law—and it was the only law—to regulate contracts for labour in that colony; or whether it was possible the House could blame those who professed to watch over the interests of the negroes for cautioning them to beware how they subjected themselves to such a law, and made themselves liable to the most arbitrary and severe punishment, under the authority of a single justice of the peace? He might multiply quotations to prove the absolute want of a new contract law in Jamaica. In truth, the books which had been laid on the table of the House absolutely teemed with information to that effect—information coming not from one quarter only, but from every quarter. The House of Assembly themselves acknowledged that a new law was absolutely necessary; the Governor of Jamaica repeated the necessity that existed very frequently; and, if it were necessary, he could quote extracts from the reports of the stipendiary magistrates, in which the greatest stress was laid by them upon this point. But he might, perhaps, be told, that if this was really the case, then, as the planters were fully represented in the House of Assembly, it was manifestly the interest of that Assembly to pass a law of contract. It might be so; and he should be sorry to think that the true interests of the planter and of the negro were distinct. But it did so happen, that the feelings of prejudice and of irritation on both sides were so strong in that island, that the Government could not rely on any prudent law being passed by the House of Assembly upon the subject, notwithstanding it might be to the interest of that Assembly to enact such a law. Therefore, he should say, that
1118
both in the case of vagrancy and of contract for labour, the Imperial Parliament would especially desert its duty and violate the solemn pledge which it gave last Session of watching over, with peculiar care, the interests of the negro population after the passing of the Emancipation Act, if it did not take some measure to secure good laws upon those two subjects. The third topic to which he had alluded, related to unauthorised occupation of land. The state of Jamaica in this respect at this moment was, not that there existed a had law on the subject, but that there was no law at all. The eleventh question put by Lord Glenelg to Sir Lionel Smith, in his Lordship's dispatch of the 15th September, 1838, was,
"By what rules has provision been made for preventing the unauthorised occupation of lands belonging either to the Crown or to private persons?"
The answer was,
"It appears that the law of the island is silent on this subject. This is one of the topics embraced in the series of orders of the Queen in council, which are about to be extended to the colonies, subject to her Majesty's legislative authority. I postpone this question, therefore, until that order shall have been completed."
If he were disposed to consider the separate interests of the planters, it might be clearly said that a law upon this subject would be one rather favourable to the planter than to the negro. He thought it a most unfortunate state of things, among a negro population, that instead of becoming industrious labourers they should take possession of the waste lands; and that there should exist no law by which they might be prevented from doing so. He thought, therefore, that a law upon this subject was especially desirable to be introduced. Perhaps it was not of the same pressing importance with the others, but as it was one of the subjects embraced in the orders of council sent out to the Crown colonies, he thought there would be no objection to its being added to those measures. He had now explained to the House the main provisions as well as the principle of the measure he proposed to introduce. The House would perceive that, in the first place, it gave to the House of Assembly of Jamaica the most ample opportunity of relieving the Imperial Parliament from the necessity of interfering at all by direct legislation in any of

1119
their internal concerns, provided they would undertake the task of legislation themselves on those points which he had mentioned, and which were of pressing necessity to the well-being of that colony. He could assure the House that, although the Government had no idea of holding out the language of cajolery or deceit when speaking to the House of Assembly—on the contrary, he would repeat that it was their intention to call upon Parliament not to abandon their right of interference, but to exercise that right, whenever occasion should require it, for the protection of the negro population—yet they might also be assured that there did exist a sincere desire on the part of the Government that Parliament should proceed as sparingly as possible, and that they hoped all their predictions might be falsified by the House of Assembly themselves legislating in a way which might fairly be considered satisfactory to all parties and interests. But in the event of the House of Assembly either refusing to legislate at all, or legislating in so delusive a manner that their laws should prove completely objectionable and unsatisfactory, he then should deem it the duty of the House to interfere. He had already stated in what manner the Governor in Council would be empowered to revive those expiring laws which were necessary for the welfare of the colony. The House of Assembly would in the first instance be invited to legislate upon the subject. They would not be asked to conform strictly and literally with the orders in council. It would be quite sufficient that they should pass acts on those great subjects he had mentioned, which should contain in them provisions efficient for the purposes intended. If that should be done, then there would be no reason to carry the present measure into effect. But if no Act should be passed in the colony upon those three subjects to which the Government could give its consent, then, after a certain time should have elapsed, the Governor in Council would be authorised to make laws upon the model of those orders which had been sent out to the Crown colonies, leaving them the power to make such alterations as circumstances might require, but at the same time to adhere to the principle, and as near as might be to the terms of the orders themselves. He trusted the House would consider that this was carrying the principle of interfer-
1120
ence to the very narrowest limit to which it could be carried, unless they really meant to retrace their steps, and to abandon that which they stood pledged to maintain, namely, the Emancipation Act, and that which they also stood pledged to do, namely, to keep a constant watch over the interests of the negro population in the British colonies, to both which the dignity and the honour of this country were plighted. Consistently with these objects, they could not hesitate to sanction the measure which he had now the honour to propose to them. He would not detain the House any longer by going into details of the measure, but would at once move for leave to bring in a bill to provide for the enactment of certain laws in the island of Jamaica, consequent upon the abolition of slavery in the said island.
Sir R. Peelwas sure that it was unnecessary for him to say that it was not his intention to offer any opposition to the present motion. He went further; he should not offer a single word which would have the effect of prejudicing or prejudging the due consideration of the general principles of the measure which the right hon. Gentleman proposed to introduce. Reserving his opinion upon the particular provisions by which the right hon. Gentleman proposed to carry his bill into effect, and speaking of the general principles themselves, he concurred in the principles which the right hon. Gentleman had laid down—that was to say, that the moment the Government had agreed to abandon their intention of suspending the constitution of Jamaica, the House of Assembly was called to return to the exercise of their legislative capacity; and this he must say, that after the opportunity thus afforded to the House of Assembly by Parliament to resume its functions, it was the manifest duty of the House of Assembly so to conduct itself, as to show that they were disposed to legislate for the colony in a right spirit. He thought that it would be a most unworthy course in the House of Assembly if they steered too close to the wind, and that it would be their true policy, as it was their manifest duty, fairly to carry into effect the views entertained by Parliament in passing the Emancipation Act. He must repeat the declaration which he had made, that he thought, after the magnificent pecuniary grant made by the people of this country, we had a right to insist that the negro

1121
population should receive not a mere nominal freedom, but the practical advantages of free British subjects. The moment he was convinced that the colonial legislature would refuse to grant, not a mere nominal freedom, but the practical advantages of free British subjects, then he maintained that the people of England had a right to insist that they should receive that equivalent for their munificence which was to be derived from placing the negro in a position which would enable him to taste the solid advantages of freedom. He had doubted whether the course which the Government formerly proposed to pursue of suspending the constitution of Jamaica was in accordance with constitutional principles. It would be with extreme reluctance, after the great experiment to which the Legislature had consented, that he should adopt another experiment, and abolish the ancient form of government which Jamaica had enjoyed for more than 200 years. He would confess, also, that it had appeared to him a matter entitled to the most serious consideration, whether with respect to the relations existing between the black and white population, and with respect to the powers which the negroes would afterwards have to exercise, it was wise or politic to represent the whites as incapable of fair and impartial legislation. These were the grounds on which he had doubted the wisdom and policy of the measure introduced by the Government for suspending the functions of the Jamaica Legislature. However, the Government had now abandoned that course, and he inferred from what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman that they had resolved to adopt another line of policy, and to leave an option to the House of Assembly. He trusted the new course of policy would prove beneficial. He hoped that it was calculated to secure the best interests of all parties, and until they had evidence to the contrary they were bound to presume that the House of Assembly would prove itself worthy of the confidence of the Imperial Parliament. But in regard to one part of the statement which had been made by the right hon. Gentleman he wished most particularly to reserve himself. He reserved himself on those points having reference to the particular acts to which the right hon. Gentleman had alluded, as he was not aware whether those acts were in accordance with his opinions
1122
or with the principles on which he should act in regard to the bill which it was proposed to introduce. He would examine those acts, however, and compare them with this and then, when he had fully considered the subject, he should state to the House the results of his examination. When he had made that examination, and fully informed himself upon the subject, then, viewing the measure as a permanent one, he should inquire, in the first place, whether he had sufficient information to qualify him to legislate on affairs so complicated, and of such grave and serious importance; and, in the second place, and he would not then give an opinion on the point, he would consider whether, by passing acts of permanent endurance, he should not be raising obstacles to the great object which Parliament and this country had in view. Such was the course which he should feel it his duty to pursue, with respect to the measure which the right hon. Gentleman had asked leave to introduce. He should not have said another word at that time upon the subject, if the right hon. Gentleman had not thought it proper to refer to party proceedings, in reference to the bill which he had proposed to withdraw, and to complain of the course which those in opposition to the Government, had felt it their duty to follow. Nothing could be more specious and plausible, nothing more easy, than to declaim against party feelings and party proceedings; and it was not difficult, by such denunciations, to create a sympathy in the public mind, in favour of those who had suffered a defeat. He perfectly agreed with the right hon. Gentleman, that to seek unfairly, and for party purposes to thwart and harass a Government, in regard to the measures which it proposed, and more particularly in regard to colonial measures, and measures having reference to slavery, or the interests of the emancipated negroes, was most uncandid, ungenerous, and unjust. For those in opposition to pursue such a course, and to seek to embarrass the Government, solely with a view to party triumph, and without any regard to the welfare of the people, or the merits or demerits of the questions under consideration, would, in his opinion, be a most unworthy proceeding, and a most improper exercise of power. He thought such a proceeding would fully justify the condemnation of the right hon. Gentleman, and afford ample grounds for denuncia-

1123
tions of party. But suppose this case should arise—suppose that a bonâ fide difference of opinion should exist between the Government, and those who were in opposition—suppose that hon. Gentlemen on his side of the House should think that the Government had not sufficient grounds for suspending the constitution of Jamaica—for abolishing the legislative functions of the House of Assembly—surely the right hon. Gentleman would not deny, that those in Opposition had as good a right to claim credit for sincerity, and the absence of party views, as those who supported the Government. Suppose that the party in opposition thought that there was not sufficient grounds for suspending the constitution of Jamaica, while the Government, and those who usually supported the Government, asserted the contrary, if the Opposition candidly and sincerely entertained their opinions, were they to acquiesce in the opinions of their opponents, and to take no steps to carry their own views into effect? He presumed that no one would advocate such a tame submission to the views of others, or contend that a great party acting honestly upon principle, should abandon their opinions or their principles without a struggle. Then what was the course for those in Opposition to pursue? Were they not to intimate the difference of opinion which existed, to state the grounds of their opposition to the measures of the Government, and to give notice that they would take the sense of the House upon the points at issue? No one would contend that the Opposition had not a perfect right to do so, or that there was anything unfair in such a course of proceeding. They were, then, to be governed by the ordinary rules in the course of the proceedings which they might feel it to be their duty to adopt. Suppose that, differing honestly from the Government in regard to the Jamaica Bill, and entertaining opinions at variance with those of hon. Gentlemen opposite, he were to give notice of his intention to resist the suspension of the functions of the House of Assembly, and to take the sense of the House upon the wisdom and policy of such a measure, would he act consistently with his duty, if he were not to take every precaution to ensure the success of his own views, and by securing a large attendance of Members, to enforce his own opinions? Such would be the course pursued by hon. Gentlemen opposite, and when those on his
1124
side of the House differed from the Government, they were necessarily obliged to follow the example. It was the only way in which they could perform their duty, and enforce the principles and views which they honestly entertained. But because they adopted such a course, did it follow that they were actuated by no higher considerations than those of party? No; both parties followed the same course, and the presumption, in fairness and candour, ought to be, that both honestly held their opinions, and that they were equally fair in the mode of asserting them. The Government might honestly think, and he was far from questioning their sincerity, that to suspend the constitution of Jamaica was just, and fair, and expedient; while those who were in opposition might, with equal honesty hold a different opinion; but surely they were not to be blamed, if, when there was a bonâ fide difference of opinions, the Opposition took every step within their power to secure the success of their own views. But although the Opposition had differed with the Government in regard to the Jamaica Bill, they had taken no unfair advantage by the course which had been pursued. Nay, they had not left the Government entirely without support. They had given the right hon. Gentleman an option as to the course which they wished to be pursued, and they had made no imputation upon the motives of the Government; but' when they saw the Government, after they had stated their hostility to the bill, resolved to persevere with the measure which they condemned, what course, he would ask, was there open to them, but honestly to oppose the bill, and to take the sense of the House upon the subject? Were they to have nothing more than a mock Opposition; and were they, whenever there was any difference of opinion, to give way at once to the wishes of the Government? Was it not the positive fact, that on all important questions, the Government took every precaution to secure as large an attendance of their friends as possible, and were those who opposed the Government, when they honestly differed in opinion, to be precluded from resorting to the same means for ensuring success? And let him remind the Government, that on the division on the Jamaica Bill, it was not alone those on his side of the House, which composed the "phalanx" which the right hon. Gentleman had charged with acting from party motives.

1125
That "phalanx" was swelled by some of those who sat on the same side with the right hon. Gentleman, and he would ask whether they also had acted from party views. The noble Lord might, perhaps, sneer at his own friends, and treat with indifference those who usually supported him, but he would ask again, whether those who joined the usual Opposition on the division on the Jamaica Bill, and who were favourable to the general policy of the Government, were also influenced by party feelings? The right hon. Gentleman was perfectly at liberty to speak for his own friends, but were the ten men who joined the Opposition, actuated also by the motives of party? In regard to the 320 Gentlemen who voted against the bill, he begged, on their part, to deny that their conduct upon that occasion, afforded any testimony to the existence of party feeling. But, after all, it was to the general principle of opposition to which he wished to allude. To endeavour to embarrass the Government, from party motives, and on questions of colonial policy, and more particularly on questions relating to the condition of the negroes, was unfair and unwise; but when a bona fide difference of opinion existed, then each party, honestly entertaining their own views, might surely, without any imputation of unfairness, resort to every means within their power to secure as large an attendance of Members as possible. And such, however much they might talk about the matter, would always be the case. Mr. Pitt might have said to Mr. Fox, that he embarrassed the Government by his opposition to the war; but would any one deny that Mr. Fox was bound, if he held his opinions honestly, to oppose the war, and to take every measure to secure the success of his opposition, consistent with fairness? From the first, he had intimated to the Government, that in his opinion, there was not sufficient constitutional grounds for suspending the constitution of Jamaica; and that opinion had been confirmed during the debate, and still more had it been confirmed by the course which hon. Gentlemen opposite, and who usually supported the Government, had felt compelled to adopt. He had therefore determined to enforce the opinions which he entertained, and to take the sense of the House upon the point at issue; and having formed that determination, he had resolved that his should not be a specious and hollow opposition, but
1126
that it should have the full weight of the great and important party which agreed with him in opinion.
Lord J. Russellcould not object to the mode in which the right hon. Gentleman had expressed his opinions, and he willingly allowed that the right hon. Gentleman had said as much on the principle of the bill, and that he had acquiesced as far in that principle as, under the whole circumstances, could have been expected. The right hon. Gentleman had a perfect right to reserve Iris opinions in regard to any of the details of the measure, or in regard to the wisdom of the policy which the Government might pursue in regard to Jamaica. He could only say that, while he agreed with the principles which his right hon. Friend had laid down, and while they had abandoned the course proposed by the former bill, of suspending the functions of the House of Assembly, the Government, although they had resolved to try a different course, were prepared to maintain the absolute necessity of providing, in the present session, that there should be the means of preventing those who might be so inclined from oppressing the now free population of the colony. The House was bound to take care, after having passed the great measure of negro emancipation, that under no power which previously existed, or which since that time had been acquired, oppression should be carried into operation by persons who might resent the passing of that measure. He owned, if he felt any regret in regard to that great and benevolent measure, it was, that, having agreed to abolish slavery, and to provide ample compensation to the slave-owners, the Legislature had not manifested somewhat less of prodigality, and that they had provided for the immediate payment of the compensation, instead of waiting till they had seen whether freedom was practically and in reality established. For while at the first, and on the immediate abolition of slavery, the liberal and ample compensation which was provided reconciled most of those who had property in the slaves, yet, after the various sums had been apportioned and paid, and when the next step was to be taken, there arose a great deal of discontent—a great deal of dissatisfaction on the part of those slave-owners with the measures which it was necessary to adopt to carry the Emancipation Act into effect, and to secure the welfare of the colony, and the

1127
freedom of the population. But, in expressing those opinions, he begged distinctly to be understood as imputing no blame to any one. He himself had agreed to the Act, and was, therefore, as liable to blame as any other Member of that House. He did not think it was necessary for him to say more at that time in reference to the bill which his right hon. Friend proposed to introduce, but the right hon. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Peel) had made some remarks in reference to the proceedings which had taken place on the last bill, which he could not allow to pass altogether without notice. He was perfectly ready to admit that, if the bill which had been brought forward by the Government was of such a nature as to render it impossible for the right hon. Gentleman to agree to its principle, and that if, on examination, he found its details such as he could not honestly sanction, it was, in such a case, perfectly competent for the right hon. Gentleman, and for those who acted on the authority of his opinion, to proclaim their opposition, and to take the sense of the House upon the points at issue. So far he perfectly agreed with what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman; but when the right hon. Gentleman did not confine himself to that course, but when, on the contrary, he pursued a course materially different, he must own, that it appeared to him that it would have been more fair, more open and candid, if the right hon. Gentleman had stated his objections to the bill in the course of the discussion, and given notice of another day for taking the sense of the House upon the points in dispute. Such, in his opinion, would have been the candid course to have pursued, and thus to have afforded an opportunity to the Government of making a full statement of their reasons for pursuing the course which they had followed, which, by the line of policy adopted by the Opposition, they had been prevented from doing. But there was another question with regard to the proceedings of the party of the right hon. Gentleman. It was natural that those who had not looked particularly into the merits of the bill, that such of the right hon. Gentleman's party as supported the general line of policy which he pursued, and who were at little pains to inquire for themselves, should agree with him in his opposition to the Government measure relative to Jamaica, and that they should follow the course
1128
which the right hon. Gentleman had prescribed. But there were others of the right hon. Gentleman's party who were not in that situation. There were those on the other side of the House who had examined for themselves, who had formed their own opinions, who were intimately connected with Jamaica, who, from the extent of their property, had a deep interest in the welfare of the colony, and therefore he must say, that when the right hon. Gentleman expressed his intention to oppose the bill, and when he called on those who approved of his general policy to follow the course which he had pointed out, and to reject the bill, he must say, in such a case, that those ought to have been exempted who had a deep interest in Jamaica, who had formerly expressed a favourable opinion of the measures of the Government, and who had communicated that opinion to various Members of the Administration. He thought that such persons should have been allowed to act upon their own views, and with reference to their own interests, and that they should not have been forced to sacrifice their opinions and their interests on the question of Jamaica to gratify English party. In asking, that there should be free permission for the expression of opinion, and that no force should be applied by those in opposition to such of their body as were owners of property in Jamaica, he thought he was not asking any very extravagant concession. But, in the late division, that concession had not been made, and every means had been used to induce those on the opposite side of the House, whose interests were at variance with the course of proceeding adopted by the right hon. Gentleman, to refrain from voting with the Government, and those means had been successful. [Name.] He believed the fact was notorious on the other side of the House. He had asserted what he believed to be correct. There was another question with regard to those who did not generally support the right hon. Gentleman, and who, on most occasions, voted with the Government, but who were considered by hon. Gentlemen opposite removed in their political views still farther from the principles of the right hon. Gentleman than were the Members of the Government. Now, he owned that it did appear to him that, in the debate on the Jamaica Bill, the right hon. Gentleman had taken a different course with respect to those hon. Members

1129
from that which he had pursued last year. It was stated by an hon. Member opposite, last year, during the discussions on the affairs of Canada, that while his party were determined to maintain their own principles, even when opposed to the Government, they would not attempt to court those who differed still more widely from the principles which they advocated than the Government itself. But he must say, that, in his opinion, the right hon. Gentleman did not act upon that principle on a late occasion, but on a principle which neither he nor his party had ever professed before, and that, in order to obtain the votes of some of those sitting on his side of the House, who had expressed extreme opinions on the subject of reform, he had courted a union with those from whom he differed more widely than from the Government. Such, at least, was his persuasion from the arguments which had been used by hon. Gentlemen opposite, and from the constant appeals which were made to those constitutional doctrines which some of those who generally supported the Government were known to entertain strongly. From these facts, he was persuaded that the party opposite was not content to rest on its own strength, and upon the line of policy which hon. Gentlemen opposite had so honourably and so beneficially pursued last year, and that they were to adopt a new line, and to seek to strengthen themselves by adding those to their ranks who were offended with the Government for not going farther and faster on the road of reform. Such was his conviction, and that conviction, strong on his mind, had most materially influenced him in the course which he had felt it his duty to adopt subsequent to the division on the Jamaica Bill. He felt convinced that hon. Gentlemen opposite had determined to adopt a new line of policy, and to court the favour of those from whom, in their political principles, they differed more than from the Government. He had thought it necessary to state this much, because the right hon. Gentleman had seen proper to state the reasons which induced him to adopt the course which he had pursued. The right hon. Gentleman had stated his reasons for the course which he had adopted, and had contended that he had acted only in the ordinary way. He, however, must say, that the right hon. Gentleman did act in a manner at variance with that course of conduct which he had adopted on various other occasions.
Sir Charles Greysaid, that it would be beyond the powers of any party to stipulate that the Government should not legislate, if necessary, for Jamaica. There was no person in that House, no lawyer, no man of research, who could point out any general principle which forbade legislation by the Imperial Parliament as to the internal concerns of the colonies, save only, as to imposing new taxes, except for the purposes of commerce, affecting the property of the inhabitants of the colonies. Indeed, it was necessary that the Imperial Parliament should possess this power of legislation, if they meant to preserve in the colonies principles consistent with the principles of the English Constitution. It was idle to talk, with reference to Jamaica especially, of the want of this power of legislation; for the whole of the present difficulty arose from an Act of the Imperial Parliament, which operated over the whole internal affairs of the island when it liberated the slaves, and he thought that those who were sharers in the great glory of that measure would shrink from their duty if they were not prepared to carry it out into full effect as originally intended. Although he had no wish to throw any obstacles in the way of the measure brought forward by the Government, yet he regretted that they had been compelled, by the hon. Gentleman opposite to abandon a measure which gave a power for suspending the sittings of the House of Assembly, for that was all the former bill would have done. It was all that he thought really desirable, and he believed that it was all that the Government were anxious to obtain. All they wished was, to be absolved from the embarrassment, and, as he believed, from the overwhelming difficulty of calling together the Assembly year by year, and to place the power of legislation elsewhere than in the Parliament, but still under its regulation and control. He thought that the Gentlemen opposite would bitterly repent having compelled the Government to abandon the measure, which would have prevented the necessity of calling the local Assembly together; for those who looked to the Legislature of Jamaica would find little probability that any beneficial change in the laws would be carried into effect. The recently emancipated people of Jamaica were as much a new people as if they had been recently conquered, and required as much care in the legislation, and out of

1131
what materials was it to be obtained? The labourers had been the slaves of the Assembly. The Baptist clergy, in consequence of the oppression of the slaves, had obtained much influence over them, and the Assembly was at war with these clergy. Of the magistracy there were two orders, the local and the stipendiary, and they were told that the stipendiary magistrates were at variance with the local magistrates, and that the latter were supported by the Assembly. Above these, they had the Assembly representing only about 2,000 persons out of 350,000, and there were but seven or eight votes which were supposed to represent the sentiments of the coloured population. Then they had the Governor, and what had been the feelings subsisting between the two last Governors and the Assembly, they all knew. There had been nothing but flagrant and constant discord. But the Government of the island did not rest there; they had next the Colonial-office, and he would ask what hope there was of agreement between the Colonial-office and the Assembly? Neither could he stop there. He came next to that House, and he found a bill, the Prisons Bill, passed without opposition, and to which the hon. Member for Kilkenny and others had given, at least, their silent approval. They were all parties to that bill, and they were now told, that before the Assembly could be expected to legislate for Jamaica, they were to obtain an answer from the Government acting for all parties in the House, either that they would retract that bill, or cease to legislate for the future. Such were the elements they had to deal with, and such the materials which they found for legislation, to secure to the people they had brought into political existence, their due share of freedom. For himself, he despaired of making the legislature of Jamaica an effectual instrument for the purpose, and he therefore thought that it would have been better to have relieved the Government from the necessity of calling this Assembly together year by year.
Sir E. Sugdensaid, that on a former occasion he had acted as the great majority of the House had done, and it was ungenerous on the part of the other side to taunt them (the Opposition) with being willing to suspend a constitution. The conclusion he had come to with respect to Canada had been after due inquiry, and after reading all the papers,
1132
which had induced him to think that a case had arisen when it was proper to interfere with the constitution of Canada. His deliberate opinion he had supported, though an unpalatable one. But was it to be supposed, because they had agreed to suspend the constitution of Canada, because the general good would be promoted thereby, that they ought to agree to suspend the constitution of other colonies? This was a mistake of the other side. Before he had voted on the Canada question, he had read every paper on the question. Illness had prevented him from attending the discussion of this question, but not from reading the papers, and he had read all the papers on the Jamaica question, and he had not had the slightest communication with any gentleman of the party to which he belonged during the time he was reading them or after he had read them. Before he read the papers he had a strong prepossession against the Jamaica planters, but the more he read them, and pondered them, the more satisfied he was, that no case had arisen which justified the measure; and if the party to which he belonged had taken up the question as a party question, and had voted the other way, he should have opposed them. Those hon. Gentlemen who had taken up the reins of Government with so much alacrity after having laid them down with such a determined air, had treated the question as a party question. The Government had taken it up as a party question. He thought it necessary to state these facts because he wished the right hon. Gentleman to understand, that it was not true that everybody in that House followed a particular course, not from conviction, not from inquiry, but simply from party feeling.
Leave given to bring in the bill.

AMERICAN TREATY.—DUTIES ON EXPORTED WOOLLENS.
Mr. Cresswellsaid, it was his duty to call the attention of the House to a petition of Liverpool merchants, and to move for papers relating to the duties paid on exported manufactured woollen goods to the United States. This question which for a tong series of years had been urged upon the attention of the Government of the country, was no party question. It was not brought forward in favour of any particular party. The House would at once admit, that it was no party question when

1133
he stated, that the first name among the petitioners was that of the Mayor of Liverpool, who signed it in the month of October last, when the noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Home Department honoured that town with his presence. Mr. Rathbone was not one of his (Mr. Creswell's) supporters, and probably never would be. He believed if he went through the list he should find in the names a large portion of his political, but he trusted not one personal, enemy. The petition which was presented to the House oh the 15th of February last, stated that in the year 1815 a reciprocal liberty of conscience was established between England and the United States of North America, by which it was agreed that all goods exported from or imported into either country should not pay a higher duty than goods exported into any other foreign country. At that time, the duty was 1 per cent. on woollen goods, and it would appear from the petition that vet y considerable sums of money had been received by the customs for the duties on those goods. The treaty had been since recognized by several acts of Parliament. Subsequently, the duty was reduced to 10 s. per cent. on all such goods exported to Portugal and other foreign countries, and this continued until the year 1817, when the export duties thus collected in infraction of the terms of the treaty were discontinued, and promptly refunded to the parties who had paid the same. In 1819 an act was passed with rather a long schedule, which provided, that woollen goods alight be exported to China free of duty altogether. This remained for a considerable time unknown to those who were in the habit of exporting woollen goods to the United States. It was discovered in 1825 by an agent of some London merchants, who applied to the Board of Customs, and claimed, that British manufactured woollens should be exported to the United States duty free, in conformity with the terms of the convention, but they refused to afford any relief at that time. It was afterwards arranged that the shipments should be made on the deposit of the amount of duty claimed, pending the decision of the Government. While this important question remained undecided treaties of reciprocity were concluded between Great Britain and the States of Rio de la Plata and Colombia, the same to the very letter as the former treaty with the
1134
United States. In October, 1838, the Treasury issued an order to the Board of Customs to discontinue the exaction of those duties, and to return the sums which had been received contrary to the stipulations of the treaties. Then there was a distinct admission on the part of the Government that they had been in error in exacting these duties, because if not, they were in error in paying them back and discontinuing the exaction. Therefore, he had a right to assume, that up to this period, then, these monies had been unlawfully exacted; but was the money to be returned? If so, he presumed no doubt could be entertained that it ought to be returned to the parties who had paid it. This order from the Treasury he should have supposed would have satisfied the Board of Customs. Not so, however, for the order embraced—but without specifying other countries besides—the United States, which ought to be exempted from these duties, and the Board of Customs took advantage of that fact, and said, that although the order was expired with regard to goods shipped to the United States, still as other countries affected by it were not specified, it was uncertain in parts of its terms, and therefore they (the Board of Customs) would not act on that part of the order even which was specific, At length, upon another petition, an order was obtained from the Treasury, in April, 1830, notifying that the countries intended to be affected by the previous order were Buenos Ayres; Mexico, Colombia, Sweden, and the United States, and on the 7th of May, 1830, the Board of Customs issued their order for the discontinuance of the duties on all future shipments. Still, with regard to repayments the parties were met with great difficulties. The money was not returned, though it had been paid in deposit, and the Board of Customs suggested to the Treasury an excuse and reason for not returning it. They said, that the statute 6 Geo. 4th, c. 107, acted as a statute of limitations (as they were pleased to call it) with respect to duties which, though paid improperly, had not been claimed within three years of the time of such payment. Now, how that statute could be made to have a retrospective operation, he (Mr. Cresswell) was at a loss to conjecture. Against this proposition the petitioners remonstrated, and said, that from 1836 downwards they had been claiming those deposits. In order to jus-

1135
tify that limitation, the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite (the Solicitor-general) must say, that this statute had a retrospective effect. The petition, however, set out the opinions which they had taken from two high legal authorities; one a right hon. Gentleman, who usually sat on the Ministerial side of the House (Sir S. Lushington), stating that this statute could have no such operation. He, therefore, contended, that the Customs were bound to return the duties paid from the period of the first deposit. But then it had been said to these parties, that they were not entitled to have the money returned, because the mere proof that they had paid the money was no proof that the money was theirs, or that they were entitled to receive it. Now, was that at all consistent with the order of 1830, which was, that they should be returned the money simply on proof that they were the parties who paid it. Now, it was impossible for any person to say that this was a fair mode of dealing with parties who had no opportunity of litigating the question, but who had been compelled to submit to the exaction when their goods were shipped. The Customs called on the shipping agents here to get a legal warrant of power of attorney from the consignees abroad, as a voucher for their authority to receive these monies. What was this but telling those merchants who were petitioners, "Why if you get the money, you would not apply it to your constituents, but put it into your own pockets." Now he could not believe that these merchants, many of whom were not his political friends—he could not believe that Mr. Rathbone, the ex-mayor of Liverpool, would keep to himself the monies of any other person; nor could he believe it of any who had signed this petition, friend or not. He was sure the right hon. Gentleman opposite would not cast such a slur upon the character of the Liverpool merchants, or of the British merchants generally, as to urge such a suggestion. On the whole, he trusted the House would see that both in justice and in equity these petitioners were entitled to have the monies back, monies which had been exacted without right, and received, as he had already stated, on deposit. The petition referred to documents which he desired to have laid on the table of the House, when it would be seen whether they contradicted or confirmed the statement made by the petitioners.
1136
They were satisfied of the truth of that statement; they courted and they challenged inquiry. He, however, hoped that the House would not hesitate now to pronounce an opinion, that the order obtained from the Government in 1830 ought to be carried into effect. At present he would, however, in point of form, move for a return of the amount of duties paid on the export of manufactured woollen goods to the United States of America since the year 1815, copies of the several petitions and memorials on the subject of such duties presented to the Lords of the Treasury, the Board of Trade, and the Board of Customs, and for copies of the several minutes and orders made by their Lordships or the said boards, respecting such petitions and memorials.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonsaid, he should have great pleasure in producing the papers for which the hon. and learned Gentleman had moved, but he must protest against the recommendation the hon. and learned Gentleman had expressed in the concluding part of his speech, in the hope that the House would now express an opinion on this subject. Against such a course, without the production and consideration of the papers moved for, he (Mr. Thomson) must enter his protest; and he sincerely hoped the House would not enter into a discussion of the matter until those documents were all before it. He would give the hon. and learned Gentleman his papers, and when they were in the hands of Members, it would be seen that a more profligate case of demand had never been submitted to Parliament. It was, however, impossible for him (Mr. P. Thomson) to allow such a statement as that which had been made to go forth uncontradicted, or without stating what was the real nature of the case. The real nature of the case was, that under the East India charters that company was allowed to ship woollens to China exempt from the duty of half per cent. levied on woollens sent out to all other countries. About the year 1826 certain parties found this out for the first time, and said that China was a foreign country to which the woollens sent out did not pay duty, and therefore all other countries which were on an equally favourable footing were entitled, under the treaties alluded to, to exemption from the payment of the duty he had stated. The case was represented to the Treasury and the Board of Trade in

1137
1826, but it was not until 1830 that a decision was given, and by that decision the duties were ordered no longer to be levied. He was not about to defend his own regulations or those of the Government to which he belonged, for the regulation and the decision were those of the Government of the Duke of Wellington in 1830.
The Treasury minute was dated November 3d, 1830, which was before the Duke of Wellington left office. Thinking that order right, he (Mr. P. Thomson) had felt himself justified in maintaining and confirming it. Now, what was the real gravamen complained of on this occasion? The real complaint consisted in a regulation which was adopted under that minute of November, 1830, and which was simply to the effect, that before the money should be paid back to the parties, they should prove that they were the parties entitled to it. He would read it. It was the second resolution, as follows:—"That the return should only be made to the actual owners or proprietors of the goods at the time of shipment, or to the shipper or consigner of the goods, on behalf of the owner or proprietor abroad, and on the production of a power of attorney, or other legal authority." Therefore, the Government had offered to pay back the monies to the parties who really proved themselves to be entitled to them. The hon. and learned Gentleman said, the money ought to be returned to those who paid it, but surely that would not be just to the parties actually entitled to it. When these papers were laid before the House, he would meet any motion which might be made on the subject. It would be his duty to resist any ulterior proceedings which the hon. and learned Gentleman might bring forward with regard to this question. But the papers, when produced, would speak for themselves.
Viscount Sandonsaid, that any delay which had taken place ought to be in fairness attributed to the right hon. Gentleman himself. The right hon. Gentleman appeared to rest his case on the imputations he had thrown upon those who claimed this money; but when he looked at the list of the names of those Gentlemen and considered the high character they bore, he considered, that he had a right to say, that no such imputations ought to be allowed to weigh against the concession of their claim. Every possible
1138
obstacle had from the first been thrown in their way, and the resolution which had been come to by the Treasury itself was now brought against the claim they set up. If the right hon. Gentleman would allow a defendant to be named, and permit the case to be brought fairly before a Court of law, he had no doubt whatever, that the question could be by that means decided in a manner satisfactory to the parties interested. The question was not so much as to the amount of the money claimed as it was as to the justice of the case, neither was it in any way a political question on one side or the other. It was a question of justice, and that House assuredly would not refuse to entertain it. He sincerely trusted the House would not follow the insidious advice—for he could only call it by that name—of the right hon. Gentleman, viz., refuse to express an opinion upon the case in the present stage of the proceedings.
Mr. Hutthad no hesitation whatever in pronouncing his opinion; that these proceedings were altogether unjustifiable; and it was of little moment under what Government the regulations were adopted. If, however, the right hon. Gentleman would fairly carry out his principle of awarding the compensation to these parties upon adequate proof of their claims, he (Mr. Hutt) would not object to such an arrangement, but he must be satisfied, that the principle would be fairly applied. At the same time he would state his belief, that nothing in these countries required a more special reform than the Board of Customs.
Mr. Thornleyconsidered, that instead of this being a trumpery case upon the part of the claimants for compensation, the case upon the part of those who resisted the payment was trumpery indeed. He considered the conduct both of the Treasury and the Commissioners of Customs in this matter to have been most unfair.
Mr. Cresswellreplied, that the right hon. Gentleman had not disputed a single fact which he had brought forward, neither had the Solicitor-general, who sat by him, risen to dispute the accuracy of any of the arguments he had made use of as to the law of the case. The right hon. Gentleman had called this a trumpery case; but if it was in reality so trumpery a case, how easy it was to get rid of it by paying the money. He also said, that

1139
these Gentlemen should not have the money unless they should previously prove, that they were the persons entitled to it; but the right hon. Gentleman seemed to forget, that he was himself all the time keeping possession of money to which he was not entitled. The right hon. Gentleman also said, that these claims might have been brought up; thereby insinuating that they had been brought up. But how did the right hon. Gentleman know, that any such thing had taken place? Had he made any inquiry as to whether such were the fact or not? It seemed to him, that the right hon. Gentleman had made no answer whatever to the arguments he had advanced; on the contrary, all he had said tended the more to convince him more than ever, that the conduct which the right hon. Gentleman defended was, that of a retention of power without right. He was willing, however, to abstain from further observations upon the subject, until the papers should be upon the Table of the House.
The papers were ordered.

EXPORTATION OF GOLD.
Mr. T. Attwood,on rising to call the attention of the House to the recent large exportation of bullion, and the consequent contraction of the circulating medium of the country, and increase of distress among the industrious classes, said, he hoped the House would hear him for a short time on a subject of very great importance to all classes of the country. The resolutions which he meant to propose were to this effect:—
"That it was the opinion of the House that a considerable exportation of gold from this country had taken place lately; that this exportation was occasioned, in a great degree, by the large importations of grain for the relief of the wants of the industrious classes; that the exportation necessarily led to a contraction of the circulating medium, and thereby increased the difficulties at present pressing upon the industrious classes; that this exportation still continues, and consequently still increases those difficulties; that, under the present law, the Bank of England possesses no means of permanently meeting this state of things, or of preventing it; that the results thus produced were analogous in their character to what the country experienced in the years 1816, 1819, 1825, 1826, 1836, and 1837, and required the speedy and effectual interference of the House of Commons."
He should touch very lightly upon the
1140
subject, in hopes that he might induce forty Members of the House to agree with him. What was the state of the case? On the 11th of January last, the amount of bullion in the Bank of England wag 9,300,000 l. sterling; on the 2nd of May last, the amount Of bullion in the Bank of England was only 6,000,000 l. sterling, being a reduction of 3,000,000 l. sterling in four months, or about the rate of 800,000 l. per month. But this was not all; for, in estimating the whole diminution, it ought to be borne in mind that this calculation was formed on the twelve weeks' average. As to the present state of bullion in the Bank, he was credibly informed that there was not now more than 4,000,000 l. worth of gold in their coffers. Gold and silver were now exporting, to the amount of 800,000 l. sterling a-month. Was not this deserving of grave consideration? The very fact of such an enormous amount of bullion being required from the Bank for exportation, drove in the bank notes, and forced them out of circulation. A contraction of the circulation consequently took place, and brought innumerable evils in its train. Many Gentlemen thought that the difficulties, distresses, and embarrassments, to which the country was every now and then subjected, were all owing to the issue of Bank paper; and although he (Mr. T. Attwood) had often had occasion to show them their error, and that these things were not ascribable to over-issues of paper, hut, on the contrary, to contractions of the currency, yet still he found those Gentlemen, again and again, reverting to the same idea—with which, also, the public press was contaminated; but, nevertheless, he was convinced he could show that these difficulties, embarrassments, and distresses, were not occasioned, and never had been occasioned, by the issue of paper money, but that they were the consequences of the contractions of the currency which were allowed, and which were effected under the present state of the law. The fact was, as he had often said, that the industrious classes resembled fishes in a pond, and the noble Lord, on the one side of the House, and the right hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth, on the other, had been playing the part of fishermen for many years. At one period the fishermen pulled up the plug, and let off the water, and left the poor fishes floundering in

1141
the mud, and then the fishermen caught a good many of them, and laughed at the rest, and called them speculators for getting upon the mud. At another period the fishermen returned the plug to its proper place, the streams of nature quickly filled the pond with water again, and the poor fishes began to swim about and enjoy themselves again, and many of them would almost cry, "Church and King, and Old England," and "Envy of surrounding nations," and "Admiration of the world." But in the very midst of their rejoicing, the cruel fisherman came again in the dark, and secretly pulled the plug; and thus again the poor fishes are left floundering in the mud. This was the whole secret of the "fluctuations" which had taken place in England for the last twenty-four years. It was all wretched nonsense to talk about "overtrading," and "overpopulating," and "overspeculating," and of twenty other Malthusian theories. These were the mere phenomena which a contracting currency presents. Thus the child in the carriage fancies that the trees and the hedges fly behind him; and thus the peasant fancies that the glorious sun rolls round the earth. It was experience and science which discovered that it is the carriage and the earth that move, and not the blessed sun. Of these errors, however, the industrious classes have been made the victims; and in matters of currency such errors had been made use of, as a kind of dust in the public eye, whilst the most gigantic system of fraud, ruin, and oppression was being carried on, that ever was heard of in the history of the world before. Now, what he wanted was, to apply a remedy, substantial and real, to these evils which the country had been subjected to during the last twenty years; he wanted to obtain the adoption of a just, equitable, and practical monetary system. He cared not what the money was, whether gold or paper, provided he got a system which would do justice, and put the means of subsistence and comfort in the hands of the working man. Something of this kind must be done; the country could not stagger on in its present state. The House remembered the state of things in this country near the close of the year 1836. But what was the diminution of bullion in the Bank of England in the nine months ending with December of that year? Why, the diminution in those nine months was not more than that which
1142
had taken place in the four months ending May, 1839. Then there was no rational ground for expectation that this exportation of bullion was about to cease, or even diminish in any material degree. There was, at the moment he was addressing the House, a premium of 1l. 15 s. on carrying 100 l. worth of gold to Hamburgh; and there was a premium of 15 s. per cent. on gold carried to Paris. But what would be the measures taken to bring back the gold thus exported? Knowing, as they must, the exasperation prevalent in the country—aware, as they were, of the hoarded vengeance which rankled in millions of hearts—would the House agree that those millions should be demonised by compelling the Bank of England to contract their issues, and so throw the millions out of bread, in order to bring back this gold into the country? For his part, his wish was to let the industrious classes flourish by means of having the monetary system adjusted to the circumstances and wants of society, instead of forcing the country to submit to a standard with which the laws, customs, and habits of the nation were alike incompatible. If the welfare of the people and the existence of the standard of value, were placed in opposition with each other, he would say, "Perish the standard, but let the people live." The operation of the present law, relating to the currency, had contracted the circulating medium, and increased thereby the distress of the country. It would hardly be denied that the distress of the country was very great, and that the contraction of the circulating medium was the cause of it; and it therefore became necessary to take some means to obviate this distress. The Bank of England, being obliged by law to pay gold for its paper, had no power to remedy the evil; for when gold was exported, it was obliged to draw in its paper in proportion; if not, if this system of drawing away gold were continued under the existing law, the Bank of England must stop payment, and then the Sheriff of London took possession of that splendid establishment. The Bank had no power to act otherwise than as it did, except by art order from the Government. If the Bank, with this state of things did not draw in its issues, it would come to a state of barter. He saw the noble Lord (Lord J.Russell) was paying great attention to what he stated—[a laugh]—and he—(Mr. Attwood)

1143
hoped he would apply the power of the Government to rectify this evil; for it was a question which could not well be discussed in open House. He thought there could be no doubt of the analogy between the years 1836 and 1837 and the present time. It was well known that the contraction of the currency produced the distress of 1837, and he had shown how the contraction of the currency was producing distress at the present time. He would take the liberty of explaining the distress of 1816. ["No, no."] Then he would explain the distress of 1810. In 1816 the price of gold fell from 5l. 11 s. per ounce, which was its price in 1815, to 4l. per ounce, and he would show how that had produced the terrible distress of 1816. It was owing to the foreigner obtaining one ounce and a half of gold instead of one ounce for his importations of foreign produce in England, at the same time that the English merchant was compelled to demand from foreigners one ounce and a half of gold for the sale of the same quantity of British manufactures, for which he formerly received but one ounce. The sudden fall of the price of gold, from 5l. 11 s. to 4l. per ounce, acted as a real bounty of nearly 50 per cent. on the importation of foreign produce into England, and as a real tax of 50 per cent. upon the exportation of British manufactures abroad. It was this which produced the paralysis of industry in England in 1816, and Mr. Attwood thought that the whole House would agree with him in opinion that it was amply sufficient for that purpose. He had often explained to the House how Lord Liverpool had relieved the distress of 1816, by renewing the Bank Restriction Act for two years, and by increasing the Bank note circulation from twenty-three to thirty millions sterling. But in the autumn of 1818 the very same state of things occurred as exists now. The relief of the general distress had driven the gold money abroad, and the Bank of England then reduced the paper money in the same degree, and partly for the purpose of preparing for the bill of 1819. In the month of May, 1819, Mr. Jeremiah Harman, then governor of the Bank, was examined before a committee of that House. He was asked why the Bank had reduced its circulation one-eighth in the last autumn. He answered "in order to prepare for the payment in gold." He was then asked, what effect such reduction had produced
1144
upon the trade and commerce of the country. He answered, "a very serious effect indeed." He was then asked, what effect he thought another reduction to an equal extent would produce. His reply was, that he thought "it would be impossible for the country to bear it." Lord Liverpool and the right hon. Member for Tamworth took warning from this advice, and they proceeded more slowly to their object, exercising, as it were, a cruel mercy, and scattering the ruin slowly and gradually over many weary years. But this slow and gradual ruin was more terrible, if possible, than the sudden and swift destruction of 1816. The Manchester catastrophe, the Cato-street plot, and the insurrections in Derbyshire and Scotland were caused by it. The late Lord Castlereagh returned from his foreign negotiations, and was horrified at the state of things in England. He brought forward his five well known monetary measures in that House in one day, and soon the distress and discontent passed away. It was then that the present Lord Ripon boasted of "the prosperity dispensed from the ancient portals of a constitutional monarchy." He ought to have known, as Lord Castlereagh had foretold, that this prosperity was necessarily produced by his five monetary measures; by an artificial increase of the circulation, adequate to support the artificial prices and obligations of the country; in fact, adequate to the duty of employing and rewarding labour, and of working the great operations of production, distribution, and consumption throughout the land. But what was the consequence of this state of things, under the pressure of the present unsuitable and fraudulent standard of value? Why, the gold was driven abroad again in the year 1825, exactly as it was in 1818; and again the paper money was made equally scarce with the gold money; and again the nation, in the winter of 1825, was suddenly plunged into a state of danger and distress. That state of danger and distress was partially relieved, as was well known, by renewed issues of paper money, and by those issues only. But the mortal pressure of the fraudulent and impracticable standard of value still remained; and in 1833 new relaxations of the system were had recourse to, which he would not now enumerate, and which produced the partial prosperity of 1836. In this latter

1145
year 1836, the very same exportation of gold money, and consequent contraction of paper money, took place, as exists now again in 1839, and as had existed before in 1818 and in 1825. It was the contraction of the circulating system which produced the distress of 1837, and it was the partial expansion of that system which had partially relieved it. In every instance the contraction of the currency had produced national distress and danger. In every instance the expansion of the currency had relieved it. He therefore called upon the House, and more particularly upon her Majesty's Government, to interfere in the present instance in due time, and not to suffer the contraction of the circulating system, now in progress, to go on until the present calamities and dangers of the country were exasperated seven-fold. He would now read to the House some extracts from public documents, emanating from Birmingham, which would prove to the House that the terrible question to which he was now alluding, had been the great cause of almost all the commercial suffering and political discontent now existing in the country. The first document, No. 1, was an extract from a petition to this House, signed by 23,000 of the inhabitants of Birmingham, in the year 1829. The second was an extract from a memorial presented to Lord Melbourne, on the 4th of November, 1837, from 13,000 workmen and 3,000 tradesmen of Birmingham, comprising all the respectable Whigs and Tories of the town. The third was an extract from the forthcoming National Petition, which he should himself have the honour to present in a few days, signed by upwards of 1,200,000 men, all expressing the same opinion and demanding the same redress; and he must beg the serious attention of the House to this subject; for they might be assured, that although some little discords had broken out among that immense body of men, and much imprudent language had been used, calculated, and perhaps intended to separate the lower from the middle classes of the community, yet these discords were rapidly passing away, and the day was not far distant when the whole of the middle classes and the lower classes would be so firmly and cordially united together, that they would be enabled to insure success to the just and righteous objects which they had in view.
Extract from the Birmingham Petition, dated May 8, 1829.
1. That in the opinion of this meeting the want of employment, the deficiency of wages, and the present general and almost unexampled distress of the country, are mainly to be attributed to the attempt which Government is making to restore the ancient and obsolete currency of the country, without having previously effected a corresponding reduction in the taxes and monied obligations of the country.
2. That by means of this unjust and impolitic attempt the real value and the real burthen of all the taxes and obligations of the country are in the process of being in reality doubled, and the interest and welfare of the industrious classes of the community are being sacrificed to the unjust aggrandizement of persons interested in the taxes and other fixed encumbrances.
3. That when the Legislature was induced to sanction this destructive measure in the year 1819, the most positive assurances were held out, that it would reduce the prices of property and labour only four per cent., and, consequently, add only four per cent. to the national burthens; and it was only under confidence in these assurances, that the bill proposing to establish the present money was passed into a law.
4. That instead of being four per cent. only, experience has proved that the reduction in the prices of the products of industry is, on an average, full fifty per cent., and, consequently, that the nation is now called upon to repay full double the amount of real value which it actually owes in the discharge of all its taxes and fixed monied incumbrances.
5. That this extreme reduction in the prices of the products of industry brings them down within the gripe of the fixed taxation, and prevents the possibility of employing labour with any profit to the employer: that the consequence of this annihilation of profit is either a general discharge of workmen, or an unnatural increase in the amount of their daily labour, or a general reduction of their wages to the level which existed when the taxes which they had to pay were a comparative trifle.
6. That the National Debt of eight hundred millions sterling is thus made equal in real value and in real burthen to sixteen hundred millions sterling, estimated in the money in which nearly the whole of such debt was contracted, and the national taxation of fifty-five millions per annum is thus made equal to a taxation of one hundred and ten millions per annum, estimated in the money in which nearly the whole of such taxation has been imposed and submitted to.
7. That it is not possible to believe, that the Legislature can really have contemplated such an enormous and gigantic fraud as this might appear to be, and this meeting trusts that the Legislature will not longer suffer the taxes and burthens of this over-burthened nation to be

1147
thus destructively increased by an insidious increase in the value of the money in which they are collected.
8. That during the period of the last fourteen years, the truth has been concealed from the public eye, and the pressure of our monetary measures has been broken and disguised from time to time by the relaxations of system which the Government had adopted, and which have had the effect, at some periods, of reducing the value of money to the level which existed during the war; and this meeting is of opinion now, when the truth is exposed to all eyes, and the pressure of our monetary measures is becoming literally insupportable, that it is not to be endured that Government should tell the people that it is too late to retract their steps.
Extract from the Birmingham Memorial to Lord Melbourne, dated Nov. 4, 1837.
3rd.—In the year 1829, more than twenty thousand of us signed a petition to the house of Commons, humbly expressing our conviction, that the great cause of the miseries of the industrious classes was to be found in the act of 1819, commonly called Peel's Bill, which unjustly converted all the paper rents, debts, taxes, prices, and obligations, of this over-burthened country into standard gold, at 3l.17 s.10½d. per oz.; and humbly and earnestly praying, from that right honourable House, that "either the monetary means of the industrious classes should again be lifted up to a level with their monetary burthens, or that their monetary burthens should be cut down equally to a level with their monetary means." Our humble prayers and representations were neglected by the House of Commons.
4th.—Many of us had presented to the House of Parliament petitions to a similar effect in the years 1816 and 1819, 1822 and 1826, at each of which disastrous periods, the very same distresses and fluctuations existed among the industrious classes, which were undoubtedly occasioned by the monetary measures which the Legislature was at each period adopting, all apparently calculated to aggrandise the wealth of the rich out of the poverty of the poor. These petitions were also disregarded.
6th.—In the month of June last, the united committee of workmen, manufacturers, and merchants of this town, through their chairman, the Low Bailiff, presented to your Lordship unanimous resolutions, representing "that the alternations of apparent prosperity, and of sudden deep distress, which had invariably attended the expansions or contractions of the currency, cannot but suggest to every thinking mind, that to our present monetary system is mainly to be attributed the present general and alarming distress." And representing further to your Lordship, that "it is the imperative duty of the Legislature to take measures for the immediate and effectual relief of such distress, before it should assume a shape
1148
which would make all remedies impossible." Upon each of these occasions, my Lord, our humble complaints, warnings, and representations, have been treated with neglect.
7th.—Hitherto, my Lord, this great subject has not been generally understood. The present is about the fifth period of depression and distress which has occurred in England during a period of twenty-two years of profound peace, which ought to have been years of uninterrupted prosperity and contentment. At each period the people have been struck by an unseen hand; their fortunes have been sacrificed, and their industry blasted, by unseen laws. Those laws are now laid bare to the public eye. Corn laws, to make scarce the food which supports man's life; and Money laws, to make scarce the money which purchases the food. Corn laws to aggrandise the landed interest; and Money laws to aggrandise the monied interest. Crushed between this double oppression, the people are either deprived of employment altogether, or they are reduced to half-employment; or they are condemned to give much labour for little money; and then they are condemned to give much money for little food.
15th.—My Lord, it is our duty to make this last and solemn appeal to your Lordship. Your Lordship knows the situation of our country. Your Lordship knows that the perpetual and violent fluctuations, by which we are all injured and endangered, are the inevitable result of the present state of the law. Whenever the present monetary system is enforced, the misery and ruin among the people create such a mass of discontent, as compels the Government to interfere with the Bank of England to relax the pressure. Then the Bank of England, in its own defence, is compelled by the state of the law, to renew the pressure; and thus the most distressing fluctuations are perpetuated. Under the present state of the law, industry cannot be safe without ruin to the lank of England; and the Bank of England cannot be safe without ruin to industry.
Extract from the forthcoming National Petition dated Aug. 6, 1838.
We are bowed down under a load of taxes, which, notwithstanding, fall greatly short of the wants of our rulers; our traders are trembling on the verge of bankruptcy; our workmen are starving; capital brings no profit, and labour no remuneration; the home of the artificer is desolate, and the warehouse of the pawnbroker is full; the workhouse is crowded, and the manufactory is deserted.
We come before your honourable House to tell you, with all humility, that this state of things must not be permitted to continue; that it cannot long continue, without very seriously endangering the stability of the throne and the peace of the kingdom; and that if, by God's help and all lawful and constitutional appliances, an end can be put to it, we are

1149
fully resolved that it shall speedily come to an end
We tell your honourable House, that the capital of the master must no longer be deprived of its due profit; that the labour of the workman must no longer be deprived of its due reward; that the laws which make food dear, and those which, by making money scarce, make labour cheap, must be abolished; that taxation must be made to fall on property, not on industry; that the good of the many, as it is the only legitimate end, so must it be the sole study of the Government.
The hon. Gentleman then went on to argue, that these repeated expressions of public opinion, repeated for ten years together, and increasing in force and determination upon every occasion, demanded the most serious attention of that House. He had shown that, ten years ago, the Birmingham Union was founded upon the fraud and the cruelty inflicted by the bill of 1819. The Reform Bill was the consequence. The men of Birmingham had given the Reform Bill a fair trial. But they found no justice for themselves, or for their country. In the year 1837, they were forced forwards again, by the cruelties and oppressions which were inflicted upon the industrious classes. For a time, however, they suspended political movements; and, by the combined exertions of Whigs, Tories, and Radicals among them, they made a last effort to act upon an impracticable Government. In the year 1837, they sent three deputations to her Majesty's Ministers. It was all in vain. Then, and then only, impelled by a dire necessity, they set on foot the present formidable combination among the people. And now, twelve hundred thousand men had answered to their call. Was this immense body of injured and exasperated men to be treated with contempt. He trusted not. It was of no use to say that it was too late to retreat. It was never too late to retreat when they were wrong, unless greater evils remained behind them than before them, which, in the present instance, was impossible. The present Lord Spencer had told him, a few years ago, that he acknowledged we had committed a gigantic error in 1819. "But," said the noble Lord, "it is now too late to retreat." To which he (Mr. A.) had answered, "Lord Althorpe, I told you, in 1819, that you were committing a gigantic error; did I not?" "Yes," said the noble Lord, "I will honestly say that you did." "Then," said I "Lord Althorpe,
1150
now mark, I that told you, in 1819, that you were then committing a gigantic error, which error you now acknowledge, and which error was then remediable, I tell you that, in now saying that it is too late to retreat, you commit another error, which error is fatal." And thus the conversation closed, with a remark of the noble Lord, which he would not repeat. He (Mr. A.) would now tell the noble Lord (J. Russell), and that House, that it was not yet too late to retreat. If they would but do justice to industry, and permit the industrious classes to live by their labour, they would throw oil upon the troubled waters of discontent, and England would again become prosperous and happy. He would put Ministers in the way of doing it without difficulty, and without wrong to any class of the community, and which would give contentment and prosperity to all. That, he thought, was an object of importance. He cared not which faction did retreat, but whatever faction did, he would promise them they would rule in that House for twenty years to come, and he did not believe that any party, without that retreat, would rule for twenty months. It was the consideration of this state of things which had scared the right hon. Baronet and his Friends from the Government the other day. It was not the honour of three Court ladies; it was not a petticoatphobia, but a paperphobia which alarmed them, and frightened them from the Government. It was the terrible spectre of his own bill which dogged the right hon. Baronet, wherever he went, and which would dog him to his grave, unless, indeed, he had the manliness and virtue to come forward, and to lend his powerful assistance in correcting an error which he assisted to commit. The great remedy for this state of things was this—rectify your currency—and things would be soon set right. All that the people wanted was a fair day's wages for a fair day's work. They wanted nothing more. But the Legislature interfered, and prevented this by its money laws. In conclusion, the hon Member thanked the House for its indulgent attention, and moved his resolutions. They could, he said, do no harm, and might do much good, as the Government might be induced "to mark, learn, and inwardly digest them."
Lord, J. Russellsaid, it was not his in-

1151
tention to detain the House by following the hon. Member into his details, for the resolutions were only a repetition of those which the hon. Member had, on more than one occasion, presented, and in which he differed from a great majority of that House, in calling on them to sanction an inconvertible paper currency. The House had on those occasions not only refused to sanction the hon. Member's proposition, but had passed resolutions of an opposite character. There was one observation of the hon. Member, in the middle of his speech, in which he (Lord John Russell) concurred. It was, that nothing was more injurious in times of financial difficulty or alarm than the passing of resolutions relating to the currency by the House. In that he fully agreed, and as a great part of the hon. Member's speech was founded on it, and as the House had already on more than one occasion pronounced a very decisive opinion on this question, he thought the best way he could now meet it was, by moving the "previous question."
Mr. Wallacethought the statement of the hon. Member for Birmingham a fair one, and deserved the serious attention of the Government and the House. The noble Lord was mistaken, in supposing that the hon. Member wanted an inconvertible paper currency. All he wanted was a currency, fixed on a better basis than the present. It was admitted, that within a comparatively few years there had been three changes in the currency. Who could tell whether a fourth would not do good? He thought the subject ought to be seriously considered, for he believed that the state of the currency was at the bottom of all the evils which afflicted the country.
Mr. Warburtonwas of opinion that the proposition contained in the hon. Member's resolutions was an indelicate one. It amounted to this—that men who borrowed at 20 s. in the pound, wished to pay at 19 s., and then at 18 s., and next at 17 s., and so on to an unlimited series of reductions. [Mr. Attwood, "Ay to 10 s. in the pound if necessary."] He called that a dishonest proposition, and whether it proceeded from Whig, Tory, or Radical, he was sure that the House and the honest people of this country would never agree to it.
Mr. Finchcontended, that though the change made in the currency in 1819 had worked injustice to one class, another
1152
change at present would be productive of equal injustice to another class of the community; but, at the same time, he thought it was incumbent on the Government to take the state of the Bank into its serious consideration.
Mr. Williamsthought the mercantile system of this country was founded on error, as was proved by the great fluctuations in the price of commodities. It was the duty of Government to take this subject into consideration, with the view of checking inordinate issues of bank notes, and thus preventing those incessant changes in the value of property and the social condition of individuals, to which we were now from year to year subjected.
Mr. Attwood,in reply, said, that his hon. Friend, the Member for Greenock, was perfectly right in saying that he (Mr. A.) had never advocated an unlimited paper currency; and he was astonished that the noble Lord (J. Russell) should still appear to misapprehend him, when the noble Lord had heard him, on that very night, and on twenty other occasions in that House, declare, that he cared not a rush whether we had a gold or a paper currency, provided only that our currency, whatever it might be, was made equal to the duties which it had to discharge, and competent alike to distribute equal justice, equity, and prosperity, among all classes of the community. The existing system of the currency had been the sole cause of all the fluctuations, difficulties, and distresses, which the industrious classes had endured for more than twenty years; and, terrible as had been its results, the country had not yet witnessed one-tenth part of its ultimate effects. Mr. Huskisson had told them, a few years ago, that they were brought within forty-eight hours of a state of barter. Did the House know what a state of barter meant? In a country like England, it meant universal anarchy; a state of things in which every man, who lived at all, must, of necessity, live by blood and plunder. And did they think, that hiding their heads, or closing their eyes, or their ears, would prevent this fearful state of things from still hanging over them? Every year it assumed a more difficult, a more complicated, and a more dangerous shape. It must be grappled with, and overcome, or the doom of England was sealed. Let the House only reflect upon what would be the effect

1153
of another had harvest in the present year; a misfortune quite possible, and he feared, from what he had heard, not improbable. How long would the four millions of gold last them? And, when all the gold was gone, did they mean at last to give a Bank Restriction Act, or to leave the Bank of England to protect itself, and, by making paper money as scarce as gold money, to send a general ruin throughout the land? To use his old figure, did they really mean to act the part of an unskilful surgeon, who, having opened a main artery in the right arm of his patient, and finding the vital fluid streaming out of the circulating system at a fearful rate, very gravely proceeded to open another main artery in the left arm, in order, as he thought, to equalise the circulation. No doubt he would equalise it; but he would inevitably produce syncope or death. And yet this was the doctrine of political economists. When the gold money was driven out of the circulating system, the economists of the present day, instead of supplying its place with paper money, in order to supply the wants of industry, very gravely proceeded to drive the paper money out of circulation also, and thus a double ruin was set in operation. But what most astonished him that night was, to hear his hon. Friend behind him, the Member for Bridport, have the confidence to attribute dishonesty and fraud to his (Mr. Attwood's) views, because they probably involved a rise in the price of gold. Why should not gold rise, like other things, if society had assumed a shape and a state in which the old price of gold was no longer competent to administer justice, equity, and prosperity, among the different classes of the community? The hon. Member knew that the magnitude of the artificial public and private debts existing in the country was so enormous, that if full payment were required in gold of the old standard, it would be found that the Almighty had never created gold enough for the purpose, either under the earth, or over the earth; and yet the hon. Member was like a foolish child playing with hot embers, and crying every time it burnt its fingers, and then playing with them again. Why could not the hon. Member learn by experience, and abandon his foolish and headstrong attempts to accomplish impossibilities? But the hon. Member spoke of dishonesty and fraud, and pre-
1154
tended that some kind of contract existed, under which the national debt, and all private obligations, must be discharged in standard gold, whether nature has created a tenth-part of the gold, or not. Did the hon. Member mean to assert that the fraud or justice of contracts is to be estimated by the intrinsic weight of bullion contained in the instruments of money? If so, he (Mr. A.) would ask him, in what money was the National Debt contracted—in gold, or in Bank of England notes, not containing more than one farthing each in intrinsic value? The National Debt amounted now, to thirteen hundred millions sterling, including five hundred millions bought up by the commissioners of the Sinking Fund. Of this, the sum of one thousand and twenty-seven millions sterling was borrowed by the Government during the Bank Restriction Act, when the intrinsic value of the non-convertible Bank note was not worth one single farthing. Here, then, upon the hon. Member's own theory, he was exacting from this plundered, swindled and oppressed people, the intrinsic value of a heavy sovereign, where the intrinsic value of one-farthing only was ever advanced, or ever contracted to be repaid. The hon. Member thought it no dishonesty, and no iniquity to take advantage of a subtle quibble of the law, and to exact the payment of his unjust, and fraudulent, and impracticable, and murderous bond, out of the throes and the agonies of a suffering and exasperated people. He (Mr. A.) could not help calling to mind the old story of the Jew, and his pound of flesh; and he could not help saying, that on the present occasion, he should have no objection to enact the part of Portia; and he would say to the hon. Member for Bridport, "Here, Jew, thou shalt have thy gold, drawn from the blood and tears of the people; it shall be of full weight, and of full fineness; but it shall be melted gold and poured down thy throat!?" The hon. Member could see no dishonesty in compelling the industrious classes to pay a cent. per cent. increase of their debts and taxes, under the solemn assurance that such increase should be only four per cent. The measures which he supported had deprived millions of the industrious classes of their independence and of their bread. In many parts of the country, these measures had left the workmen with only three days work per week; and com-

1155
pelled them at the same time to give a double quantity of the products of their labour in the payment of their rents, debts, and taxes, and thus their burdens were increased 400 per cent. instead of four per cent., and yet, when he (Mr. A.) proposed to rectify this enormous and murderous fraud, and to relax the infernal talons which are now driven into the nation's throat, the hon. Member behind him had the confidence to cry out "dishonest!" With regard to himself, he begged the House to understand, that in all his actions upon the currency he never contemplated going beyond the level of depreciation and of prices which the present corn laws were intended to impose. Remunerating prices were undoubtedly necessary both in agriculture and in commerce and manufactures, or society could not exist. But there were two ways of obtaining remunerating prices; one, by diminishing production, and the other by increasing consumption; one by diminishing the quantity of the comforts and necessaries of life in the markets, and the other by increasing the means of purchase and consumption in the markets. By one plan the people were made wretched and miserable. By the other, they were made prosperous and happy. By the one plan, millions of mouths and naked backs were left hungry and naked; by the other, both the food and clothing were readily transferred into the uses of the people. It was this kind of prosperity which he (Mr. A.) wished to establish throughout the land. He did not wish for one branch of society to flourish at the expense of another; but be wished for all to flourish equally and securely together. He wished for the people to have such a kind of money in circulation as would enable them to pay remunerating prices for all the food which could possibly be grown in England, and for all which could possibly be imported from all the countries in the world. He thought he had sufficiently proved the truth of the resolutions which he proposed. He had shown that the exportation of gold was at present very large, and rapid in its effects; that it compelled a general and very large contraction of the whole circulating system, that it thus produced very great and general increased distress among the industrious classes, that the Bank of England had no means of permanently relieving it, and that it was absolutely necessary that Parliament should interfere in
1156
due time. He thanked the House for their patient attention, and as he was urged by his Friends around him, he would be content with a simple negative of his resolutions, and he would not press the House to a division.
Resolutions negatived.

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By the Marquess of SLIGO, WESTMINSTER, and ANGLESEA, Earls of ABERDEEN, and WINCHILSEA, Viscount LORTON, Lords HILL, SEAGRAVE, and DACRE, and the Bishop of WINCHESTER, from in immense number of places, for a Uniform Penny Postage.—By the Earl of ROSEBERY, from Sutherland, for Church Extension in Scotland.—By the Earl of WINCHILSEA, the Bishops of LONDON, RIPON, and EXETER, and the Earl of MALMESBURY, against the Ministerial plan of Education.

OUTRAGE ON THE BRITISH FLAG.—THE MEDEA.
Viscount Strangfordsaid, that as the noble Earl, at the head of the Admiralty, was in his place, he wished to know whether that noble Earl had received official information regarding an outrage which had lately been committed on one of her Majesty's vessels by a French ship of war?
The Earl of Mintofelt extremely indebted to the noble Viscount fir having afforded him an opportunity of explaining a circumstance which had undoubtedly attracted a very great deal of attention, and upon which there was a very great deal of misrepresentation before the public. It was perfectly true, that a very unfortunate collision had occurred between her Majesty's ship Medea and a French brig of war, and the accident had been attended with very unfortunate circumstances. As soon as possible, however, the French officer made that reparation and apology, which he felt to be due, for the consequences that had ensued. He happened to be more fortunate in this instance than on the former occasion, for he was in possession of full details of the affair from the commanding officer. He had received both public and private letters giving an account of the transaction, and as he thought it not improbable, that the subject would be mentioned, he had brought those documents with him, and would read them to their Lordships. The first letter, which was of a public nature, was as follows:—
"Medea, Bermuda, 20th of April, 1839.
"Sir,—I beg you to acquaint the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, that on the evening of the 11th instant, at 7 P. M., a vessel was discovered, supposed to be a slaver, standing along the land, to the southward of Cuba. Our course was immediately altered, with the intention of boarding her; a gun was fired without shot, and after that a volley of blank cartridges was fired; and, as she did not shorten sail, the Medea stood after her, and, on approaching her and bailing, found her to be a French brig of war, The vessels sepa-

1077
rated a little, and wishing to inform him, that all was settled at Vera Cruz, I ordered Commander Notts to approach him a second time, the vessels came in contact with each other, from the Medea not answering her helm so quickly as was expected, when several shots were fired from the stranger, intended to cross our bows, which unfortunately wounded a seaman, Matthew Harper, whose leg was afterwards amputated. The stranger proved to be the Griffin, French brig-of-war, of twenty guns, from Brest, bound to Vera Cruz, and on the French commander, Captain Olliver, coming on board, he offered the most ample apology, and stated the reason of this firing was, that he considered it possible, that we might have have been a Mexican vessel of war, as he had heard, that several vessels had been fitted out in America to cruize against the French; and he regretted very sincerely, the unfortunate occurrence which had brought the two vessels in contact with each other, and declared, that he never intended to fire more than one gun across our bows, but that his men disobeyed his orders, and that he would inquire into their disobedience.
"I am, &c.
(Signed) "P. J. Douglas,
"Commodore and Commander-in-chief.
"Charles Wood, Esq., Secretary of the "Admiralty, &c."
The same facts were stated more fully in a private letter which was to the following effect:—
(Private) "H.M.S. Medea, at Sea.
"April 13, 1839.
"My dear Sir Charles—You will perceive by my public letter that we have had the misfortune to be fired into by one of the French brigs-of-war, who unfortunately took us for a Mexican cruizer, as he had heard, that several vessels had been fitted out in America and were cruizing among the islands; we had hailed him, and could only make out that he was a French vessel of war from France, and wishing to learn what news we could, as well as to tell him that all was settled in Mexico, I wished to speak to him again, and in doing so (the Medea not answering her helm so quickly as Captain Notts expected), we unfortunately hooked his quarter boat, which he considered might be an attempt on our part to board, he had directed one of his guns to be fired across our hawse, but as his men were at their quarters, by one of those unforeseen as well as unfortunate occurrences, six of his guns went off, and I regret to say, the shot struck us and wounded one of our men. As I was aware, that she was a French vessel of war, I did not like to fire into her, and occasion, God knows what mischief to both vessels, but hailed him to heave to, which he did, and when he came on board, made the most ample apology and excuses, and no one could deplore the accident more than he did, which he assured me most energetically on the quarter
1078
deck, arose entirely from his men having mistaken his orders. I cannot tell you how much this unpleasant affair has distressed me, though it is one of those occurrences over which I had no control, and I trust that my forbearance in not firing into her, knowing her to be a French vessel of war, will meet your approval, as I could not consider this an attack on our flag, as it was perfectly dark, and no colours could be seen."
It was quite clear, from what he had stated, that this was an unforeseen accident and that no evil intention could be imputed to either side. He thought that this explanation would be satisfactory to their Lordships and to the public, for he had seen, that attempts were made to take advantage of this incident, in order to produce somewhat of ill feeling and to excite the sensitiveness of a high minded and sensitive profession.
Viscount Strong fordsaid, that the explanation of the noble Earl was certainly satisfactory; but some how or other those accidents occurred much snore frequently of late days than heretofore.
The Earl of Mintosaid, that there had been two such accidents certainly; but they had not arisen from any intentional error on either side.

CANADA—COLONEL PRINCE.
Lord Broughamsaid, that in giving notice of a motion on this subject for to-day, his intention was, to give his noble Friend opposite (Lord Ellenborough) an opportunity of stating whatever he might have to lay before their Lordships in vindication of Colonel Prince, and therefore, in bringing forward the motion, he should not make any statement, but reserve himself for a reply to the noble Lord's defence of Colonel Prince, should such be necessary. The noble Marquess (the Marquess of Normanby) had stated, that he had no objection to lay before the House a copy of the minutes of the Militia Court of Inquiry on Colonel Prince. He, therefore, would confine his motion to an address for that document.
Lord Ellenboroughsaid, that it must be clear to their Lordships, that the circumstance of the noble Marquess not considering himself at liberty to lay before the House, the whole of the evidence, made it more necessary for him to detail to the house the statement made by Colonel Prince in explanation of the circumstances that took place. He felt in doing this, that he was doing justice not

1079
to Colonel Prince only, with whom he was wholly unacquainted, but to the members of the Court of Inquiry, and the great body of persons in Canada who appeared to have sided with Colonel Prince, Before he read to the House the statement of Colonel Prince, it was necessary, that he should bring before the House a few facts which had taken place previously to this occurrence. Colonel Prince was a member for Essex county, and also a magistrate, and lived at Sandwich, and at a meeting of the inhabitants held on the 9th of June, 1838, certain resolutions were agreed to, all most strongly condemnatory of the course which the Government had pursued respecting certain prisoners who had been taken during the preceding winter, and sent before courts of justice for trial. They said:—
"At the same time we think it right to state, that notwithstanding all along our frontier we have suffered hardships and privations both by day and night, which it is scarcely possible to describe, still we have the mortification to see, that the brigands Theller and Sutherland have escaped the punishment which they merit, and that the murderers at Point-au-Pelée Island are not to be treated as such, but to be detained as prisoners of war. It is, therefore, the opinion of this meeting, that the course adopted by the Government in this case is unwise and impolitic towards the public in general, and the inhabitants of the frontier who have suffered so cruelly."
These were the feelings of the persons who attended that meeting.
But they went further:—
"From positive information which has been communicated by individuals whose veracity we cannot question, we have no hesitation in saying, that we are in danger of being invaded by a numerous band of murderers, and that, not having a sufficient military force for our protection, we are almost driven to the necessity of abandoning our homes. We cannot help feeling that our lives and property are not protected as we have a right to expect; and that, in any future warfare for the protection of our lives and properties, a thirst for sanguinary, retributive vengeance may take the place of that exemplary and gallant forbearance of temper which has hitherto distinguished the conduct of the inhabitants of this province."
These resolutions were sent to the Governor, Sir George Arthur, who on the 19th of June transmitted them to Lord Glenelg, along with an opinion of the Attorney-general delivered for the purpose of excusing the conduct of the Go-
1080
vernment with respect to the trial of prisoners. He said:—
"With respect to foreigners, by the laws of the country they cannot be prosecuted as traitors, as they owe no allegiance to the Sovereign; but it is true that they might have been put to death on their capture, at the moment they were taken, as outlaws, as having forfeited all claim to the protection of the laws of all civilized countries."
The Secretary of State acknowledged the receipt of that opinion of the Attorney-general, but he made no remark whatever. The event which was anticipated actually took place. An attack was made. It was made, he thought, on the 4th of December, 1838. Sir George Arthur said, that on the 4th instant, a band of ruffians, about four hundred strong, landed about three miles above Sandwich, Having set fire to the barracks at Windsor, and consumed in them two militiamen, they killed a man of colour, and afterwards murdered Staff Assistant-Surgeon Hume, mutilating his body with an axe. In the action twenty-five were killed. That was the statement given of the transaction in the official documents. Colonel Ayre, who commanded at Amherstburgh, went to Windsor, where the action took place, and in his report not one word was said of the murder of these four men. But he would now read to the House a statement made by Colonel Prince in his own defence. It was made on the 9th of April last. After the result of the Militia Court of Inquiry was made known, a dinner was given to Colonel Prince at Toronto. The Mayor took the chair, and several members of the House of Assembly and different militia officers were present. The opinion of the Attorney-general, that they had a right to put to death these outlaws, appeared to have been admitted at the meeting at which Colonel Prince made his statement. The chairman said:—
"Our object is twofold. To do honour to the active and gallant officer on my right, as well the defender of our domestic altars, as the vindicator of our national honour, and to proclaim to our bloodthirsty assailants, that on British ground, from British hands, they are to expect nothing but the fitting doom of murderers and outlaws."
He (Lord Ellenborough) would now read a portion of Colonel Prince's statement. He felt that it was impossible for him to read to their Lordships the whole

1081
of the statement made by Colonel Prince. Portions of that statement were filled with personal reflections, with which he should not trouble their Lordships, and respecting which, he felt it would not be right to bring them forward upon such an occasion as the present. What he meant to read from the statement referred exclusively to the question then before their Lordships, and it would be found, that Colonel Prince did not disguise the part he had taken in the transactions which had been commented upon. Colonel Prince began his statement by saying, that he would not disguise from the meeting, that he was aware, that there were some who questioned the propriety of what he had done. He believed, that there were but very few, but still he should give an account of all that had taken place. He observed, that fifteen months ago seventy villains, misnamed patriots, had assaulted their little town, and having cannonaded it for two successive days were defeated. Their leader was taken and escaped, and no one was punished by the law for that outrage. Then came another invasion by the buccaneers. Many prisoners were taken, and "no one was shot or hung, as they ought to have been." They had not yet even been tried, and they were kept to fatten in their prisons—places in which these plunderers were much better off than they had ever been. Then came the capture of General Sutherland and some of his followers; but did they shoot even those ruffians on the spot? Such was the state of their frontier in 1838. Armaments were again preparing on the American side. Colonel Prince then continued in these words:—
"During this period we were continually expecting an attack. A large reward was offered in Michigan for my head, because I was a loyal man, and an active officer. At length, after having harassed us perpetually, they invaded us. They murdered a poor negro in cold blood. They murdered and afterwards mutilated the brave and excellent Dr. Hume. Only one hour before, he was in my house full of health and life, and when I saw him the victim of the knife and the axe, when I saw the mangled body of the negro, when I saw my loyal fellow subjects lying around the smoking embers of their homes, and when I saw that the punishment for heinous crimes had vanished from the earth, and that the verdict of a jury went for nothing, I ask, in the face of the whole civilized world, whether the time had not arrived when the severest, when summary, justice ought to be inflicted on that murderous crew The five, wretches whom I
1082
ordered to be executed, were shot during the excited period of an unexpected attack from the enemy, or when we were marching up to meet them. This the evidence before the Court of Inquiry will show; and the other villains who were taken, we handed over to the civil powers, but very few of them have been executed."
Lord Broughamwas exceedingly glad that his noble Friend had pursued the course which he had thought proper to adopt upon the present occasion; for none other could have better served the ends of justice. The person whose conduct had been attacked by him in that place—attacked upon grounds which he should presently show had not been in the slightest degree shaken—and attacked, too, in language which was not more strong than the occasion required—but having been so attacked it was fitting that all should be heard that could be urged in the defence of that Gentleman, and in such a case he must say, that a better course could not be pursued by his noble Friend than that of reading Colonel Prince's own words, containing his own account of his own acts. If Colonel Prince had been an ignorant person—if he had been a man of imbecile understanding, if he had been a man not accustomed to defend himself and others—if he had been an unlearned, inexperienced, feeble, advocate in his cause—he then should have doubted that his noble Friend had pursued the best course in the defence of Colonel Prince, by substituting the words of the accused for the arguments which his noble Friend might have used. It was plain that a man who made that speech had corrected it for the press; it was manifestly a speech reported by himself, because if it were not so, then he must say that the reporters of after-dinner speeches in Canada were far superior to any that were to be found in Europe. But if it were only a report of a speech made, he must say that it was a most striking and able defence, and one of the most touching narratives he had ever heard, and the more touching and the more striking because it was made by an eye witness of the scenes which he described. Colonel Prince had now, then, no right to complain of being condemned without a hearing; or of being attacked behind his back—for Colonel Prince stood in the place occupied by his noble Friend. If Colonel Prince were in that House he could not have done better for himself

1083
than his noble Friend had done for him, in putting forward his own case in his own words. Their Lordships had however now to go to the rest of the case, of which they had not heard; and first, as to the verdict of the meeting at Toronto. It was said that they were all united together—that they were all of one opinion—and that they had received the defence of Colonel Prince with the greatest acclamation. Now he must own that he should have been better satisfied with the applause and the acclamation, if it had been bestowed upon Colonel Prince, not by the meeting in Toronto, where the matter did not take place—where they took Colonel Prince's own account, and where they knew personally as little of the real facts as any of their Lordships.
Lord Ellenboroughbegged the noble and learned Lord to look to the proceedings of the Court of Inquiry.
Lord Broughamsaid, that he was coming to the Court of Inquiry. But how was the case made out for Colonel Prince by the opinion of the meeting at Toronto? They knew nothing personally of the matter—they heard only his own statement of the facts. He did not think that such an appeal from the law—from the administrators of the law of the land and of justice—could be sanctioned by their Lordships. Nor did he think it was a right course of argument for his noble Friend to pursue, to read the vituperations resolutions which had been passed at a meeting in Canada, and which he did not deny contained the gravest charges against the Government, because it was not more vigorous in the execution of the laws—which blamed the Government because it had not carried on the law with sufficient vigour—and which complained that so few persons had been executed—that a greater number had not been tried; or that they had not been hanged after trial—he knew all this; but then he was bound to say in common fairness, that when a Government thought proper to exercise mercy to persons under prosecution, he was bound to admit until the contrary could be proved, that they were in the right, and that those who censured them were in the wrong. What would any man say of a meeting in Middlesex or Westminster, complaining that A, B, and C, had no been brought to trial, and that D had been tried and not been executed; and, when they had thus
1084
called for the blood of these men, they then declare that the Government should be responsible for all the outrages that might be committed in Surrey, Yorkshire, Kent, or other disturbed districts, and all this simply because the Government did not choose to hang all the men the meeting wished to see executed? He supposed that noble Lords were not so anxious to defend Colonel Prince, as to give up their own colleagues; but whether they did so or not, the law of the land determined otherwise. He, therefore, treated very lightly the statement of his noble Friend, and which was the foundation of his whole argument, that there was great discontent in Canada, because so few men had been executed—that they declared that if the Government did not hang more men than it thought fit to hang, that they would be obliged to have recourse to retributive justice, and take it into their own hands! Did his noble Friend—did any other noble Lord—defend such conduct? If the Government did not choose to hang a number such as would be sufficient to please the people in Toronto, then they gave notice to Government, they would take the law into their own hands—that is, into the hands of a mob—and thus act over again that which was the horror and the scorn of all—the Lynch-law of the most savage parts of America. It was, then, because the Government did not do this, that Colonel Prince took the law into his own hands, by shooting those men the moment they fell into his power, for that was the defence of Colonel Prince. [Lord Ellenborough: there was also the opinion of the Attorney-general of Canada.] Yes: but if the opinion of the Attorney-general had been given in the language which had been read, it was, he could only say, new to him. If it could be brought forward as so actually given, in the defence of Colonel Prince, it was no doubt an extenuation; but he could not have expected—he could not have foreseen—any such defence being in the possession of Colonel Prince. How could any lawyer ever dream of its being possible that any other man, calling himself, and exercising too, the office of Attorney-general, could give such an opinion. How any lawyer could have formed an opinion so inconceivable, so outrageous, he was wholly at a loss to imagine. He was, indeed, the more surprised when he heard some of their Lordships

1085
cheer that opinion. They were the highest court of judicature in the realm; in their hands was the administration of the criminal law; and they who were judges in the last resort; and yet he had heard half a dozen at least of their Lordships cheer an opinion, which was the grossest outrage on all law that had ever been put on paper, not merely by a lawyer, but by the most ignorant man that ever existed. It was had from beginning to end—it was absurd and monstrous from the beginning to the end. It began by stating that which was the least outrageous proposition of all, but in proportion as it became more outrageous, the more was it cheered by their Lordships, who were the judges in the last resort of criminal law. It stated that a foreigner could not commit high treason. Colonel Prince, who had first been an attorney on the Oxford circuit, and had left it to go to America, must have known the absurdity of such an opinion. But what was the remedy which this opinion of the Attorney-general proposed—that as the foreigner could not be punished as a traitor, he might be treated as an outlaw! When before was it ever heard of a man being called an outlaw, until after due process of law and proclamation against him? But did a lawyer ever speak of a man being treated as an outlaw—that is, a man placed without the protection of the law—which was the sense in which the word was used by poetasters and romance-writers, and others not particular in the use of language, and therefore did not care for using it correctly—as they called a man "a felon," who had never committed a felony in his life—suppose a man were an outlaw, that did not entitle another to shoot him, as the vulgar notion appeared to be. What man that had ever read even Blackstone could fall into such an absurdity? Even if a man were really an outlaw, and after proper sentence pronounced to that effect, and he should himself put that man to death, he would be guilty of murder. But what said the Attorney-general of Canada? That a man could be treated as an outlaw, and then he drew the inference, that he could be shot on the spot as an outlaw. Such a proposition was absolutely groundless in point of law. But then his noble Friend had not read the answer of the Secretary of State to him, denying that it was the law. [Lord Ellenborough: it was not denied tit all.]
1086
That was a very great oversight, and somewhat altered the case; for Colonel Prince might be at the same time a very good soldier and a very had lawyer. [Lord Ellenborough: The opinion was sent on the 19th January, 1838.] He certainly must regret that such very had law should have been permitted to pass unnoticed and uncensured; for, according to that, no man's life was safe. But he had now to call their Lordships' attention to his statement of this affair, and which gave a very different version of Colonel Prince's conduct from that which they had heard. It was given, too, by those who saw and knew what was the conduct of Colonel Prince.
Lord Ellenboroughrose to order. He had to remark that the noble Marquess had refused to give all the evidence which had been stated before the Court of Inquiry. He apprehended that what his noble and learned Friend was about to read, was stated before the Court of Inquiry.
Lord Broughamwas, he said, about to refer to the allegation of the 8th of December, 1838, made by Robert Mercer. It was signed by Colonel Mercer, who was in the habit of friendly intercourse with Colonel Prince, and who had no prejudice against Colonel Prince; on the contrary, the lieutenant of Colonel Prince was the son of Colonel Mercer, and he admitted, that he had always been treated with the greatest civility by Lieutenant Mercer, and never had one word to say against him. This Lieutenant Mercer took a different view of Colonel Prince's conduct than that which the gentleman himself entertained respecting it. First, then, as to the opinion of the people amongst whom Colonel Prince lived: he began by saying, "The Contemptible," for he was a gentleman who used strong language when he had his own defence to make: he said, "the contemptible and ungrateful people with whom I had the misfortune to be connected for five years;"—and this, too, is the same Colonel Prince's manner of answer to obligations from some of his quondam friends, who were disgusted at his outrageous conduct—"In answer to all my quondam friends, I treat their expressions and opinions with the utter contempt which their ignorance, ingratitude, and prejudice are deserving of." Colonel Prince would not take his verdict from his friends, the Mercers; he would not look for a verdict

1087
from his friends who were on the spot, and in whose neighbourhood he had lived for five years, and amongst whom he had been making a fortune—them he treated with contempt, and their opinions he disregarded; but he appealed to the verdict of the absent and the ignorant people of Toronto, who met to celebrate his achievements, because he had put to death several, when they were crying out for the death of many others. This was the verdict upon which Colonel Prince relied—while he rejected the verdict of those who were on the spot, and who were all witnesses of the fact. What, then, was the character of the witnesses who were against him? Up to this time no disrespectful words had been used; but as the using strong language in one party begets, if it does not justify, similar language on the other, he is therefore told by Mr. Mercer, "You are at perfect liberty to treat with contempt your quondam friends, as you may thus save them the trouble of doing the same by you." Now, who were they that made representations to Sir George Arthur upon this subject? The senior officer of militia, Colonel Elliott, Mr. Charles Elliott, Mr. Baber—and the representations were also signed by Mr. Arkin and Mr. Woods. Now, from whom should be ask a character of these men? Was it from Sir George Arthur, or from Colonel Airy? No; but it was from Colonel Prince himself, who stated that they were in the battle, and in his dispatch he said of them, "that they behaved with the greatest gallantry in the affair at Windsor." Their lordships had then their account of this matter; and there were the affidavits of four witnesses. It was said, that the affidavits of those witnesses were extra-judicial, and that being voluntarily made, they could not be prosecuted for perjury. That was not quite true, although the former profession of Colonel Prince might have led him to such a conclusion, for he believed that a voluntary affidavit, containing false allegations, was indictable. It proved, however, this—that taking it as a statement, it was made under all the solemnity and impression of an oath, and it was under that impression they made the horrible, revolting, and disgusting statement of the conduct of this individual. Colonel Prince had observed a prudent generality in his statement; he carefully took care not to specify the time, when the whole Question hung upon the
1088
point of time—whether it was during or after the battle that the men were put to death; but still, after all, Colonel Prince had said enough to convict himself. He said, that the men were put to death—that he ordered them to be shot on the spot—either during the expectation of being attacked, or when they were marching to meet the enemy. Did the noble Duke opposite ever, in the anxious expectation of an attack from the foe, order four prisoners to be shot?—or did he, because he was marching up to meet the enemy, put those to death who had surrendered upon the faith of quarter being granted to them? And yet this was Colonel Prince's own account of the transaction! But the fact was, that the men were put to death after the attack was over. This was the fact, according to the statement on oath by four eye-witnesses; this, too, was the statement of thirteen persons, five of them being justices of the peace, and one of them a district judge; this, too, was the statement of Adjutant Cheeseman.
The Marquess of Normanbyunderstood that the noble and learned Lord was about to make charges against Colonel Prince, which had been already submitted to a Court of Inquiry.
Lord Brougham.The Court of Inquiry admitted the charges.
The Marquess of Normanby.It negatived all the aggravating circumstances.
Lord Brougham.The Court of Inquiry had come to a very extraordinary decision. They had given a very had judgment, and he did Dot mean to rely on it. He would quote Sir George Arthur's opinion. Sir George Arthur said, "As to the invidious colouring which characterises the details of the facts in the address, it is not in any way substantiated by the evidence." This said that the colouring was not supported by the evidence, but it did negative the facts. It left the substance and substratum of the charge untouched. [Lord Wharncliffe: Read the finding of the Court of Inquiry.] There was no finding, or at least the finding was not published. He would now read to them the statements of the officers to whom he had before referred. They had heard Colonel Prince's evidence in favour of himself; they had allowed him to tell his own story in the way he chose; his noble Friends near him had listened with great composure and exemplary patience to the most violent attacks upon themselves, and they must

1089
now hear the statement of these thirteen officers, five of whom were justices of the peace, on the other side. They had heard one man's story, but they did not seem disposed to hear the story against him; but he said, that they should hear it.
Lord Ellenboroughsaid, that he had abstained from reading that part of Colonel Prince's statement relative to the affidavits of these thirteen officers, in which he affirmed their falsity.
Lord Brougham: Only false as to the aggravating circumstances. However, he would not read the affidavits, but the statements which had been made by those officers, and of which there had been no denial, but an affirmance by the sentence of the Court, and Colonel Arthur's judgment and reprimand. Their lordships should hear what grounds there were for the statement, that prisoners had been butchered in cold blood. These officers said, "Adjutant Cheeseman brought in a prisoner, who had been just taken, and surrendered him to Colonel Prince, and Colonel Prince immediately ordered him to be shot, which was done accordingly." The fact was not denied; and Colonel Prince himself, in his letter, said, "Just at the close, and immediately after the engagement, four men were brought in, all of whom I ordered to be shot on the spot, which was done accordingly." Colonel Prince had not been very judicious in his defence, for his accounts of the transaction given at different times did not quite agree, At the dinner he said, that it was "while he was in momentary expectation of an attack, and was marching to meet the enemy." Now, there was a very wide and marked distinction between the two cases. He (Lord Brougham) passed over a great deal of the statement of these officers. Three-fourths of it were occupied with complaints that Colonel Prince had not done his duty against the brigands. So little anxious were these thirteen persons to favour the party to which the prisoners belonged, they charged Colonel Prince with not having done his duty against the brigands. When they were retreating, Lieutenant Ranken offered, with fifty men, to attack them; but Colonel Prince would not budge from Sandwich, and while he was waiting for reinforcements the four men were shot. The document went on to say,—
"While we were waiting here for reinforce-
1090
ments, a prisoner was brought in wounded to Colonel Prince in the town, who was surrounded by several men in the most frequented part of the main street; and while the wretched man held up his hands, pleading in the most piteous manner for mercy, Colonel Prince ordered him to be shot. This happened after an officer, on hearing Colonel Prince, had told the unfortunate man to run for it, and said to the twelve men who were about to shoot him, 'You scoundrels, do you mean to murder your prisoner?' The wretched man did run for it, but he was shot on the spot by Colonel Prince's repeated orders. This took place in the presence of several ladies and children, whom the noise had brought to their doors."
This, by the way, did not look very like the expectation of a battle. As to the third case, they continued,—
"Another prisoner, also severely wounded, was brought in. Charles Elliot entreated Colonel Prince to reserve him to be dealt with according to the laws of the country, but Colonel Prince, using an oath, said he must be shot—and he was shot immediately."
As to the fourth case, it was this:—
"Colonel Prince had just reached Windsor, when he was informed that a wounded man was lying at William Johnson's house. The man was most miserably wounded, his leg having been shattered by a bullet. He was taken after the action to William Johnson's, and promised surgical aid for his wound. Colonel Prince was told when he arrived at Windsor, that there was a wounded man lying there who had been taken prisoner in the action. He ordered him to be shot, which was done accordingly."
The fifth case did not seem to have been adverted to—and he (Lord Brougham) much wondered at it—either by Sir George Arthur or the Court of Inquiry. It was this:—Captain Broderick had taken one of the brigands prisoner, a man who had sued to him for mercy. Now he (Lord Brougham) must here say, that he was the last person to say a word in favour of these brigands, or of their atrocious and desperate conduct in those inroads, which had been not only sordid in their object, and predatory in their character, but had been accompanied by every circumstance of aggravation and horror. It was enough to make the blood curdle in the veins to think of a frontier so ill protected against violations of the law by the American Government, whose duty it was to protect it, or they ceased to deserve the name of a government. It was shocking to think, that any honest man might meet with such a fate as that

1091
of Dr. Hume, who was put to death and mangled, with circumstances of cruelty too horrible to relate. He (Lord Brougham) agreed in every word that might be said in reprobation of the horror of such proceedings. But, however that might be, however guilty those persons might be of every species of enormity, those who put them to death without law or legal trial were guilty of neither more nor less than absolute murder. Captain Broderick, as he had said, had taken a prisoner, and when the man sued for mercy, had told him, "You have fallen into the hands of a British officer." Colonel Prince, however, having continued his march fourteen miles, fell in with the prisoner and ordered him to be shot, although Captain Broderick had given him quarter, and told him that he had fallen into the hands of a British officer, and therefore that his life was safe. Colonel Prince ordered this man to be shot, and it was instantly done. Did Colonel Prince express sorrow for these proceedings? On the contrary, in his letter he expresses
"Deep regret that he did not shoot every scoundrel of them as fast as he was brought in. On the next occasion he would assuredly do so; nor should the solicitations of sympathizers on one side, nor of marauders on the other, nor the cowardly apprehensions, miscalled humanity, of others, drive him from his purpose."
This was Colonel Prince's resolution. What he designated as "the cowardly apprehensions, miscalled humanity," of some persons, was explained by a circumstance which he would mention. The Indians had taken seven prisoners, and one or two of them proposed that they should be shot; but one of their chiefs said, "No; we are Christian men, and can't shoot a captive." That was the Indian notion of Christian mercy and forbearance. These prisoners were then brought to Colonel Prince, an Englishman, an emigrant attorney to the New World, who, however, without very good grace, talked in the greatest contempt of broken-down adventurers—and who ordered them to be shot; but at that moment Captain Elliot and three others, one of whom was an English clergyman, interfered, and one of them used the expression, "For God's sake, don't let a white man murder those whom an Indian has spared." That was a very natural appeal to be made under the circumstances, and
1092
it had its effect; for the Colonel suspended his orders, but he at the same time expressed his disapprobation of the interference, and made them responsible for his not having shot the men—a responsibility which he had no doubt would not weigh very heavily upon them for the remainder of their lives; but the feeling of Colonel Prince on the matter was expressed in the letter which he had already read to their Lordships; for there could be no doubt that, when he talked of the cowardly apprehension, miscalled humanity, he referred to the interference which had been exercised on that occasion. The law on the subject was so well known that it could hardly be necessary to refer to it; indeed, he should have thought it wholly unnecessary but for the cheering that had taken place, which would almost induce one to believe that some of their Lordships had no better acquaintance with the law of the land than if they had been Attorney-generals for Canada. Suppose a man who had shot another was pointed out to him an hour after, and that he then put the murderer to death, he should himself be guilty of murder. Even if he saw a murder committed, and put the murderer to death, he should be guilty of murder, unless it was done in self-defence. Suppose even that he saw a man convicted after a trial by a jury of his peers and sentenced to die—nay, suppose him outside the prison door on his way to the place of execution, and that he should then destroy him—even in this case, and their Lordships would admit it was a strong one, he should be guilty of murder. This was the law. Now, what said Sir George Arthur? As to the facts of the case, there was no variance in the main between the statements he had read, and the admissions of Colonel Prince. Colonel Prince had avoided particulars as to time and place in his statements, but they were not inconsistent with the representation of the thirteen officers. Colonel Prince had seen those representations. He knew what the charges against him were, and by whom they were made. He knew the evidence against him, and that the witnesses were some of the most respectable parties in the province. He had, therefore, full opportunities to make the best defence that his conduct admitted of. After the evidence had been taken by the Court of inquiry—evidence which he was sorry to hear could not he produced—after

1093
the court had given its verdict, judgment was given by Sir George Arthur with the whole case before him. This document set forth, in the first place, that an inquiry had taken place, and that
"The invidious colouring which characterises the details of the facts in the address signed by Colonel Elliott and others, was not in any way borne out by the evidence."
Sir George Arthur had dismissed Colonel Elliott for his conduct, but that certainly did not prove Colonel Prince not guilty; it was quite beside the question. In the document it was farther stated, that Governor Arthur
"Most deeply regrets that, under circumstances of impending danger and highly excited feelings, Colonel Prince should have been induced to anticipate the result of legal proceedings, in directing summary execution of four of the captured criminals, while he exonerates him from the charge of wanton cruelty."
"Directing summary executions," indeed! He had put four cases, every one of which the English law calls murder; but, according to Colonel Arthur's account, be might in each of these cases have killed the man who had committed a murder, and the Governor's description of the offence would be an "anticipation of the result of legal proceedings," by directing the summary punishment of the individual. No doubt it was an anticipation of legal proceedings, but it was called murder by the law of England. It contained no recognition of this new crime, discovered by the mealy-mouthed Governor of Upper Canada. In Hawkins, Blackstone, or East, he knew of no chapter in the pleas of the Crown, "On the anticipation of the course of legal proceedings by summary execution." The offence to which this name was given was not, however, unknown to ourlaw—itwas called murder. What was the use of legal proceedings, if Colonel Prince, or any other, might (at his pleasure) anticipate them? What was the use of trying a man, if his guilt was pre-determined upon? If a man was brought to trial, he might be acquitted; but, notwithstanding that, Col. Prince called the prisoners whom he shot, brigands; they might, however, have been pronounced by a jury to be no brigands at all. His noble Friend had set up something of a defence, and it was the only injudicious thing his noble Friend had done. He had referred to a resolu-
1094
tion of a popular meeting in Upper Canada, complaining that, though persons were tried and convicted, they were not hanged. But Colonel Prince, if he acted on this ground, that though the prisoners might be convicted, they would not he hanged, made no reference to it in his defence. He seemed to feel no defence necessary, and only regretted that he had not shot more of the brigands. These were the facts of this case, and he had felt it his bounden duty to call their Lordships' attention to them. He could not retract one single word which he had formerly used with respect to the case, for the more he examined it, the worse was his opinion of it. He was not surprised that Colonel Prince's friends should have given up his acquaintance. He was not astonished at the way in which be had been treated by the people of his neighbourhood, and by those quondam friends whom Colonel Prince said, he had the misfortune of living among for the last five years. They saw Colonel Prince's conduct, and felt abhorrence at it, with the opinions and feelings of British subjects in their bosoms, in which indignation boiled over, as it had done in him. The noble Marquess had stated, the other night, that the Government here sent over an expression of its disapprobation of the conduct of Colonel Prince. That was a gentle phrase. He disapproved of murder, certainly; but his disapproval was merged in his abhorrence of it, and he must apply a much stronger word of censure to the greatest crime known to be committed by man. It should always be considered, that either this anticipation should deserve no censure at all, or it amounted to an unauthorised killing of five persons, which he stigmatised as murder. Before he concluded, it was only fair that he should add that the only bright spot which he could perceive, in the whole case, was one which arose, he regretted to say it, from the blunder of the Law Officers of Canada, and the neglect of the Government here in not setting those blunders right. He thought that the opinion of the Attorney-general was calculated to mislead that person, and yet he could hardly consider that a person bred up in the law of this country should not at once have seen the absurdity of that opinion; but, as it came from high authority, and as it had been allowed to remain uncor-

1095
rected, it was possible that Colonel Prince might have acted under its influence. However, though he wished to give Colonel Prince the benefit of that opinion, he could not withdraw his mind from the statement which Colonel Prince had made in his own defence, and in which he did not at all rely upon that opinion of the Attorney-general. He had now stated all the circumstances which had been urged in mitigation, and also the impression which those circumstances had made on his mind.
The Marquess of Normanbywished to state some facts connected with these transactions, which the noble Duke (Wellington) would probably like to hear before he made his observations. He was particularly anxious to make them after the allusion of the noble and learned Lord to the decorous silence which had been observed by the Members of the Government. He had thought it more convenient, that the noble Baron opposite should make the explanation which he had to offer, and that when he saw the terms of the motion he should give the best answer to the case brought forward. He must begin by stating, that he felt—and he believed, in common with all their Lordships—the deepest regret that this transaction had taken place. With every allowance that could be made in consequence of the gross exaggeration and great misstatements that had been made—which had been submitted to the Court of Inquiry, and had operated very widely to the prejudice of Colonel Prince—the circumstance was most deeply to be regretted. He was sorry, that the noble and learned Lord in the course of his statement had gone into these misrepresentations, as if they had never met with contradiction. He felt it necessary to resist the motion of the noble and learned Lord on two grounds. In the first place, it was perfectly unusual, that the proceedings of a military court, whether a court of inquiry or a court martial, should be called for by Parliament. The Government, too, had as yet received only imperfect information of those proceedings. He had received a part of the evidence, but not the whole. That part of the evidence allowed him an opportunity, which perhaps was not perfectly regular; but after the House had heard the noble and learned Lord on the subject, he felt he should not be doing justice to Colonel Prince if, having in his possession a précis of the evidence of the thirteen gentlemen whose names were at-
1096
tached to the document which had been referred to, he did not state that their evidence did not in any respect support what had been alleged. With respect to the fifth case, to which the noble and learned Lord had alluded—that of the prisoner taken by Captain Broderick—there was a distinct disavowal on the part of all the gentlemen of having any knowledge of this case. Every one of the witnesses, on being asked, said, that of the prisoner No. 5 he knew nothing. It was obvious what the impression created on the minds of the Court of Inquiry and of Governor Arthur was, for otherwise he would not have alluded, as he frequently did, to the number of prisoners as four. With respect to one of those witnesses (Colonel Elliott) he so little shared in the feelings of the noble and learned Lord relative to this transaction, that he took the chair at a public meeting of the county of Essex, in the neighbourhood where these things had taken place, at which a resolution was passed approving of the principles of Colonel Prince's proceedings, and wishing that they might come into general operation [Lord Brougham: The approval was limited]. The resolution was one of approval, and Colonel Elliott had been certainly in the chair. It happened after the transactions had taken place, and Colonel Elliott must have attended the meeting to approve of the principles of Colonel Prince's proceedings. Sir George Arthur, in a communication to him had alluded to the private misunderstandings which led to the allegations, on the part of some of the individuals, against Colonel Prince, who had previously never taken any part in opposition to his proceedings. He could not think it necessary for him to refer to what had been touched upon by the noble Baron opposite; but he could not but think, that some mitigation of the conduct of Colonel Prince was to be found in the atrocious cruelties committed on the same morning by a merciless banditti, whose object was plunder to be obtained by the sacrifice of human life. It was impossible, that the fate of Assistant-surgeon Hume should not have created a deep impression on the minds of Colonel Prince and of those under his command, and over whom he could have had but an imperfect control. A great deal depended upon the actual period at which the facts occurred, and he would state strictly as he believed the order in which, and the time when, they really occurred. On the 4th of December in the morning, Colonel

1097
Prince being in his house, about half a mile from the town of Sandwich, was roused by an alarm that the town of Windsor, between two and three miles distant, was in the hands of brigands. The number was variously reported, but all agreed that it was very considerable. Colonel Prince collected, he believed, not more than 150 men at the first intelligence, and started for Windsor, believing it to be in the possession of the brigands. He found a considerable body of them posted in the neighbourhood, from which they were driven towards the woods, Colonel Prince following them all the way. On his arrival at the border of the woods intelligence was brought to him that Sandwich, the place he had left in the morning, was in possession of a considerable body of these marauders. Colonel Prince upon this determined to march at once to Sandwich, and retreated, as he said, from Windsor in double quick time. He did not know whether, after attacking the brigands at Windsor, he might not have to sustain an attack from those whom he imagined were at Sandwich. In this way he (the Marquess of Normanby) thought that Colonel Prince's report to Colonel Airy might be reconciled with his speech at the dinner. On one occasion he said the four prisoners were brought in "immediately at the close of the engagement." This was the engagement at Windsor; and on the second occasion he said it was during the anxious period in which he was expecting an attack of the enemy. This was the attack from those whom he believed to be at Sandwich. There was no doubt, that Colonel Prince at the time must have laboured under considerable anxiety. He did not know whether there was any place left to which he could retreat, or whether Sandwich (in which his ammunition and stores were deposited) was in the hands of the marauders. Considering not only these circumstances, but the general unhappy state of excitement caused by the atrocious inroads of those merciless ruffians, by whom all feelings of humanity were disregarded, and all comforts of home and feelings of security destroyed, it was less surprising, though not less deeply to be deplored, that Colonel Prince should have taken such means of punishment. It was his (the Marquess of Normanby's) duty to take every means in his power to prevent the recurrence of such proceedings, and to convince the parties exposed to these inroads, that, besides the guilt of such retaliation, it must utterly destroy public sympathy with their sufferings, With re-
1098
spect to the opinion of the Attorney-general of Canada he could hardly speak, as it had not occurred during his period of office. He believed the opinion had been given in consequence of a doubt expressed as to whether these persons could be tried as traitors. In the opinion of the Attorney-general they could not. But no time had been lost in correcting this mistake; and in consequence many of those men had been tried for treason. With reference to this transaction, when be (Lord Normanby) came into his present office, he found a dispatch of his noble Friend, stating, that he would suspend his opinion till Governor Arthur had made further inquiries. On looking further, he found, that in March the noble Lord had written again to Governor Arthur for information. A few days after this a despatch arrived from Governor Arthur informing him of the Court of Inquiry. He (Lord Normanby) wrote a reply, approving of the Court of Inquiry. He had not yet got an answer, but he had the proceedings and the finding of the Court of Inquiry, and also part of the evidence, showing, that thirteen gentlemen did not in any respect support the allegations which had been made in the first instance. With reference to the motion for papers, he should not have the slightest objection to grant them; but unless the House had the proceedings throughout, it would be useless to call for the proceedings of the Court of Inquiry. With respect to the correspondence, he should have a strong objection to produce it, because he thought it would not be fair to Sir G. Arthur. He had done everything in his power to strengthen the hands of Sir G. Arthur, and he believed that the discretionary power which had been conferred upon him had been exercised with a sound judgment and with beneficial effect. He had no doubt that Sir George Arthur was fully aware of the responsibility of his situation, and that being so, he would en deavour to discharge the arduous duties connected with it with justice, firmness, and mercy. From all the communications he had had with Sir G. Arthur, he felt assured, that the embarrassments under which he necessarily laboured would be very much increased by the production of any further correspondence; and he was glad of the present opportunity publicly to state his determination, while he had that confidence in Sir G. Arthur, to continue to extend to him the difficult discretion with which he was invested; for by so acting he felt

1099
convinced, that he would be not only doing justice to the individual, but doing what would be most beneficial for the public service.
The Duke of Wellingtonhad readily given way to the noble Marquess, and he was very glad he had done so. His object in addressing their Lordships at all, was to remind them of the situation in which the House stood respecting this question, and to point out what he thought it requisite they should well consider, namely, that they were not exactly proceeding in the usual course of justice in discussing a question of this kind, at this particular stage of the proceedings. The noble and learned Lord having heard of this transaction, came down to the House the day before yesterday, and pronounced a very strong, a very hostile opinion on it, though not stronger than it deserved. His noble Friend near him had considered it his duty to make known to their Lordships some circumstances which had come to his knowledge from having perused the papers on the subject. The noble Secretary for the Colonies had said that the Government had stated their disapprobation of the proceedings. This was the position in which the, question stood on Tuesday. Their Lordships had now this case; they had gone into the consideration of the whole of the circumstances on both sides—circumstances which occurred six months ago, and which involved the commission, the honour, perhaps the life, of an individual employed in the service of the country, and also the conduct and character of the Governor of Upper Canada. Of that functionary's conduct the noble Marquess had justly pronounced his approbation. Their Lordships had left out of the question altogether that which he supposed no man could well have a doubt about; namely, that if Colonel Prince had misconducted himself as a military man—and that was his character in this transaction—there was another person concerned in this matter; namely, his gallant Friend, Sir John Colborne, whose duty it would have been to have brought Colonel Prince to a court-martial, and to have punished him according to the finding of that court. Besides, the gallant Colonel was liable to be tried for his life before the ordinary tribunals of the country. Having all this before the House, and in the minds of their Lordships, they had now come six months after the trans-
1100
action to the discussion in that House of dl the details, and expected that justice would be administered, whether in a civil or military tribunal after such a discussion. He never heard of such a discussion taking place in that House of Parliament in reference to any one liable to such charges until after the trial was over, the evidence heard, the sentence pronounced, and the House was thus rendered competent to express an unbiassed opinion upon it. Under these circumstances he could not help feeling that their Lordships were not in a situation to discuss this matter. His noble Friend who sat near him had described to their Lordships the nature of the war carried on in this province, and he would not enter upon the question at any length, after the opinion which had been stated by the noble and learned Lord opposite. He had no wish to weaken an opinion so pronounced, than which nothing could be stronger. The noble Secretary for the Colonies had also stated that he concurred in that opinion. He (the Duke of Wellington) had already drawn attention to this subject on the legitimate occasion, on voting an address to her Majesty. He had then stated the probability—nay, the certainty, that we should at last come in that country to a system of retaliation, and that if the thing were not stopped, a state of warfare would arise more barbarous than any ever known; which riot only could not be equalled in the present times, but which he believed had never been paralleled in history. He could now tell their Lordships what he knew to be a fact, that such a system of warfare was actually going on there; and his opinion was, that it would be a deep disgrace to the country to continue to endure it. If her Majesty had not the power to assert her rights, to protect her loyal subjects on that frontier, we ought to abandon the province, and withdraw at once from the country. He was aware that some persons in this country wished us to abandon the province for other reasons. In those reasons he did not at all concur; his opinion was, that it was most desirable to retain this colony. His conviction was, that our honour required that we should maintain it. Measures having been taken by other nations to deprive us of these colonies, our honour imperatively demanded that our utmost energies should be exerted to preserve them. But he must say this, that if we did not grant

1101
protection to the lives and property of the Queen's loyal subjects in these provinces, if Parliament would not vote the forces necessary to give that protection on the frontiers—we ought to abandon them altogether, and thus put an end to the system of warfare now carried on. It was a war full of the greatest horror, misery, and outrage. At this moment, our guards and picquets were necessarily kept on the whole line of frontier, from one end of the country to the other. If by any accident we were obliged to withdraw our troops from one part of the line, the persons very appropriately designated brigands came over in sledges or some other description of carriage, crossed the country, and the houses of the inhabitants everywhere in that particular direction were destroyed, life taken, and property plundered. All along this frontier there was a perpetual fire kept up from the side of the United States, across the imaginary line, upon our guards, our picquets, and even on the single sentinels posted along the line. In war, every means was justifiable on both sides to get the better of the enemy; but, certainly, he had never before, in the whole course of his experience, heard of such a thing as firing on single sentries, not to say guards or picquets. Yet this species of warfare was going on at present in this province. There had lately been a message brought down with respect to uniting this province with the other province; but had we possession? Was there a single spot of ground, except that on which the troops stood, on which her Majesty's authority could be enforced? When first these events occurred, he (the Duke of Wellington) recommended the Government to provide a sufficient force; he told them, that there ought to be no such thing for a great country like this as a little war. He recommended that a large army and a large fleet should be assembled on the Saint Lawrence at the opening of the season 1838. These recommendations were not acted upon. They were not adopted, and the House had nothing to do, but to look at a little distance from us to see the reason why these recommendations were not adopted. What had been the consequence? That Government had been under the necessity of employing in its service the inhabitants of the country, the militia, the various local corps, instead of having bodies of regular disciplined troops commanded by
1102
officers who knew their duty and how to perform it. It was owing to this, that these unhappy events had occurred—events which no one man more deplored than he himself— and the guilty persons engaged in which he was most desirous to see punished. It was most unfortunate that it should have been found necessary to make use of what he could but call an inferior description of troops. Horrors such as those which had been witnessed could hardly be prevented, except with regular troops carrying on their operations under the command of officers of character, conduct, and experience. This was the only remedy for such evils as those, which must invariably prevail, more or less, wherever irregular acts of revenge were carried on by bodies of men acting on principles of civil war. He had in his experience more than once had the offer of men of this description, but he had always sent them away, preferring rather to have a limited body of troops than to have with him troops of this description, who would not obey the orders they received. His opinion was, that unless a sufficient army was provided, we must in the end, abandon the country. Volunteers and that description of troops would always carry on war after the manner of civil war, and the same consequences would always ensue. It was impossible that the war could continue to be carried on as it had hitherto been conducted, without the same results.
Lord Glenelgsaid, that a large augmentation had already taken place of the force in Canada; it was not necessary to specify the exact amount, but at this moment a very large force was stationed in Upper Canada, and he would venture, with respect to put it to the noble Duke, whether he thought a still further augmentation should take place, and whether it would be possible so to augment the regular forces stationed there, as to depend entirely upon them for the defence of the colony. He wished to advert to the observation which had been made as to his not having in his answer to a despatch, alluded to the opinion of the Attorney-general of Canada. He could not but remind the House of what had been stated by his noble and learned Friend—namely, that Colonel Prince had 'not rested his defence upon that opinion of the Attorney-general, but upon the emergency of the occasion. According to the

1103
Attorney-general's opinion, it was impossible to bring the culprits to trial as traitors, because they were foreigners, but he thought they might be tried as outlaws. In his (Lord Glenelg's) answer to the despatch, he said, that he had already written so fully respecting the matters to which it related, that his approval only was necessary. The fact was, that that was by no means, the first time that the point adverted to in the opinion of the Attorney-general for Canada had been brought under the consideration of the Government. On the contrary, it had long been a question tinder discussion, and the opinion which the Attorney-general for Canada had formed was not confined to the law officers of the Crown, but was also held by individuals occupying high judicial situations in the colony. That opinion had for some time been before the Government, and had been submitted to the consideration of the law officers of the Crown in this country. A series of correspondence had taken place conveying the result of this consideration and contesting the validity of the opinion of the colonial authorities. The discussion continued for some months, and when he alluded in his answer to the despatch to what he had already written respecting the matters to which it referred, no one could doubt, that he meant the discussion between the law authorities of the colony and those of this country, who differed, and the latter of whom were supported by the opinion of the Government. It could not, therefore, be said, that the authorities in the colony were not aware of the opinion of the Government upon the subject, for the opinion had been in the strongest manner already communicated to them.
Lord Broughamrejoiced at having originated this discussion, if for no other reason, because it had been the means of drawing from the noble Duke opposite the solemn opinion which he had that night given upon the detestable warfare now raging upon the American frontier. He (Lord Brougham) felt quite sure, that the great name of the noble Duke, as well as the strong and powerful reasoning by which he had supported his opinion, would not be without their effect in America, but would eventually induce the Government of that country to arouse itself, and call upon its citizens to put an end to a system, which if they had not the power to repress, they
1104
could hardly be called a civilized community. There was no one who was more desirous than he of the prosperity of America, but he was anxious that the people of that country should see, that no difference, whatever, of opinion existed here, as to the proceedings now taking place upon the American frontier; all, including those who were the strongest advocates of the just claims of America, were entirely agreed upon this subject.
Motion agreed to.