In the current of the popular opinion, however, a prejudice had been created against the noble lord, and from a desire to do this away he had presented the narrative in question to his majesty. Though in this there was error and mistake, it did not appear to him (Mr. Perceval) to be of that character, and to deserve those epithets with which it had been loaded by the honourable gentleman. He wished the question to be adjourned, not with a view of doing it away, but of giving previous consideration to the evidence distributed this day, and that the discussion should proceed on Monday. This, after a long conversation, was agreed to by Mr. Whitbread, and the debate was adjourned till Monday; when general Crawford spoke in defence of the earl of Chatham, and hoped the house would upon mature deliberation fully acquit the noble earl of those motives ascribed to him by other gentlemen.

Mr. C. Wynne felt himself bound to vote for the resolutions.

Mr. Stephen, the constant and able advocate of the measures of ministers, said, that though he was not satisfied with the conduct of lord Chatham, if called upon to give a definitive vote he must meet the resolutions with a negative. He considered lord Chatham as hardly dealt by, and much injured, and expressed sorrow for having participated in the unfavourable impression of his conduct produced by the calumnies with which his character had been assailed, not the smallest part of which was borne out by the evidence taken at the bar. Lord Chatham appeared to him to have done all that, under the circumstances, could have been done. Lord Wellington, and that was no light praise to any general,

He

could not have done more. could not, therefore, admit of presumptions against lord Chatham, who had certainly some hereditary claims to the attention of that house. He contended, that to vote the resolutions would be to punish lord Chatham, whilst the merits of the expedition would be afterwards to be inquired into. The honourable and learned gentleman then adverted to the merits and services of the father and brother of lordChatham, and called upon the house to do jus tice to the son of Chatham and the brother of Pitt. He besought gentlemen, not by any invidious contrasts to pluck stones from the monument of the father to bruise the head of the son. The honourable and learned gentleman next contended that the narrative contained no reflection upon the admiral or the navy, and concluded by moving the previous question.

Mr. Brougham made a most eloquent speech in support of the resolutions, and concluded by say. ing: "If you wish to render the responsibility of ministers effective, or rather, if you are not willing to put an end to that responsibility altogether, it is impossible that you can refuse your assent to the proposition of my honourable friend. If you wish to act fairly towards ministers themselves, I call upon you to discountenance a system which exposes them to invidiousness and treachery, which may render them responsible for the advice of others over whom they have no controlIf you wish to maintain that re sponsibility which is essential to the existence of the constitution, by making ministers accountable for the conduct of the government-If you wish to preserve that which forms the barrier cf the king's in, violability, I adjure you to adopt F 2

this

this motion. I plead,alike, indeed, for the ministers, the constitution, and the sovereign, when I exhort you to mark the unconstitutional conduct of lord Chatham by an appropriate expression of your disapprobation and censure." The debate was continued to a late hour, and almost all the principal speakers took a part in it.

Mr. Canning said, He could wish that a precise degree of guilt should be fixed, and he would have the punishment somewhat moderated. Without something done by the house, after what had been shown, their proceedings would appear very extraordinary. The sccond resolution he could wish to see modified. He had drawn up a few lines, not with any intention of moving them himself, but for the purpose of submitting them to the consideration of the house, for any honourable member to adopt who might approve them. He then read his modification, to the following purport:

"That the house saw with regret, that any such communication as the narrative of lord Chatham should have been made to his majesty, without any knowledge of the other ministers: that such conduct is highly reprehensible, and de. serves the censure of this house."

Mr. Whitbread made an animated reply. Much, he said, had been said of the purity of lord Chatham's intentions. With that the house had nothing to do; they were to form their decisions only from the facts before them. He had been condemned for the contrast he endeavoured to draw between the conduct of the late earl of Chatham and the present. He was asked, Will you be so inhuman as to tear the stones from the moburent of the father to bruise the

head of the son? He could appeal to those who had opportunities of judging of his habits and feelings, whether in private life he was capa ble of violating any of those social affections that bound man to man. But there he was not his own master; he would discharge his duty as an honest and independent servant of the people, and hold up the proud, noble, and constitutional conduct of William earl of Chatham, in glaring contrast with the suspicious and unconstitutional conduct of John earl of Chatham. He would maintain that the right honourable gentleman had not answered one of his arguments; and it was to him an auspicious omen that he should carry the question. He could assure the house that he did not act in a spirit of vengeance, but in the spirit of a representative of the people. Advecates of lord Chatham, there were none; but he stood there the advocate of millions of the people of England, who insisted on the principle of responsibility, and who wished to make ministers or others answerable for whatever advice they should give the sovereign. must again repeat, that he trusted the house would not suffer the right honourable gentleman to take refuge under the shabby shelter of the previous question, and give the country an opportunity of saying that parliament dare not do its duty. Should the first resolution be carried, it would then be time for the house to consider whether they would adopt the amendment of the right honourable gentle

man.

He

After several explanations from Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Canning, Mr. Bankes, and others, the house became clamorous for the question. Strangers were ordered to with

draw

the previous question : For it Against it

Majority

188

221

33

Mr. Whitbread's first resolution was carried, and he waived the second. Lord Chatham shortly after resigned his offices under government; but it appeared from the following conversation that on the 16th of April he had not given up the salary attached to them.

Mr. Whitbread wished to ask the chancellor of the exchequer one question. The matter of his question was so strange and doubtful to himself, that he almost asked now only to have it denied. Lord Chatham, as the nation had been given to understand, had resigned his place about two months ago; but it was whispered that the resignation was a feint; that he still held the office of master-general of the ordnance; that he still possessed the patronage; and moreover, that he still condescended to receive the salary. Was this monstrous story true? Could it be true? He (Mr. Whitbread) was anxious, absolutely anxious,for the credit of the ministry, to have it answered in the negative.

The chancellor of the exchequer stated that lord Chatham still held

his place. Till his patent was revoked, it was his duty to retain it; and the patent was not to be revoked in places so circumstanced, until the appointment of a successor. The weighty business which occupied government might account for that successor's not having been appointed; but lord Chatham did not assist at the cabinet.

Mr. Whitbread was astonished at this discovery. What! was this great delusion to be practised on the people of England? A man

was the statement of ministers); he thus withdrew from the publicity of the situation; but how was this accomplished? By a vile delusion. For when the ministers gave the country to understand that lord Chatham had retired, the contrary was the truth. The minister had not been without oppor tunities of clearing up this point; for on being asked if the place was filled up, his constant answer was, that government intended to fill it up as soon as possible, thereby plainly intimating that it was vacant.Was this to be sheltered under the pretext of a patent place? The question had not been, whether lord Chatham was a cabinet minister,but whether he was master-general of the ordnance. If his removal had not been perfectly understood, an

address would have been moved to displace him. There was one more question only that he required, to have his full appetite for wonders satisfied. Did lord Chatham continue to receive his salary?

The chancellor of the exchequer professed that he could not be certain on the point, as it was not within his office. Mr. A. Cooper admitted that he had received his salary up to last quarter.

House of lords, March 16.Lord King rose to move for the production of various papers connected with the important subject of foreign troops now in this country, or in British pay. This subject was one which his lordship considered to be of great constitutional importance. It had always been so considered by the people of this country, though very recently too little notice had been taken of it. If, however, the same views of the constitution existed, it must still be viewed in a serious light by every F3 thinking

thinking person. Within a few years past the number of such troops had much increased; and it appeared by the army papers laid before the house, that the expense of them amounted to a million sterling, a sum surely sufficient to require some consideration. His lordship meant to say nothing by way of reflection on the conduct and character of these foreign troops; but yet, however well they might have behaved, he thought that nobody would attempt to say they were equal to our own native British soldiers. Yet it could not escape the recollection of noble lords, that these persons were, almost all of them, not only foreigners, but the natural born subjects of countries now under the dominion of our enemy. He could not think that a military force of such a composition, with the temptations that might naturally be thrown in their way, were fit to be intrusted with the defence of this country, or of any of our most important military stations at home or abroad. He should refrain at present from pushing his observations further on that particular point. He could not better show the opinions held in former periods in this country, on this unconstitutional subject, than by reminding their lordships of what they would all recollect to have been the language of a speaker of the house of commons, in addressing the throne on the introduction and keeping up of foreign troops in England. His lordship then alluded to the well known case of the Dutch guards, in the reign of William III. and other cases of later, occurrence.

The

foreign soldiers who had been with in some years past brought into this kingdom, were understood at first to consist of emigrants and

and others, who were only stationed here, as on their passage, or for other immediately pressing reasons, but by no means as a species of permanent establishment incorporated into, and making a part of, the regular military forces of Great Britain. Their number had, notwithstanding, been very greatly augmented from Hanover, and from other parts of Germany; and certainly called for some notice and examination on the part of their lordships. He also had found that they possessed certain advantages not enjoyed by the British soldier, such as a limitation of their services to particular parts of the world, the true state of which it was one object of his motion to ascertain. The footing on which they were placed with respect to pay was another object, as he should desire to know why they should receive much superior pay than they had been used to, and why they were placed on a footing with our military establishment (the most costly in Europe) if they were bound to perform less service than our own army. His lordship concluded by moving for several papers containing accounts of the number of foreign troops in British pay, of the number of them employed in this country, of the nature and of the extent of the services for which they were engaged, of the particulars of their pay and establishment, &c. &c.

The earl of Liverpool rose and said, that he should not trouble the house with any remarks on what had fallen from the noble lord, as he had no sort of objection to the production of any of the papers required by the noble lord's motions. The production of the pa pers was then agreed to zem, con.

House of commons, March 23,

—Mr.