Star. — London, England, 1813-04-03 00:00:00

Mexquis concluded by moving, summoned for Wednesday. Lord LIVERPOOL agreed in the magnitude of the question, and observed, that on no question had he given-more time and attention, and- be was pee. pared to defend the opinions connected in the Reso lutions moved in another part of the Legislature. His Lordship had no objection to the introduction of the subject at the time stated by the Noble Marquis. The Earl of BUCKINGHAMSHIRE stated, that the question had been brought forward consistent with the form of proceedings of equal consequence to the Country. Their Lordships were ordered to be summoned for Wednesday. . The Noble the Lords be EAST INDIA EHIPPING. The Marquis WELLESLEY then presented a Pe tition from the Merchants and Owners of India built ships, praying to be permitted to enjoy the same rights and privileges as the owners of British ships. His Lordship stated the able assistance afforded the Government during the conquests in Egypt, the In dian seas, Scc. by ships of the above descrtption, and contended that it would be sound policy to grant the prayer of their Petition. Lord GRENVILLE agreed in the advantages the House would derive by a statement of the gene. nl outline of the plan of the East India Question, previous to the discussion. Lord Grenville also supported the claims of the Petitioners in the last • instance. Lord WELLESLEY presented other Petitions from persons employed in the service of the East In dia Company in favour of the trade of the Port of London.—The Petitions were laid on the table. EXCII ANC'S OP PRIPONPILS. The Marquis of LANSDOWN said, he had to address their Lordships on a subject of great im poi t ince to the Public. He had been applied to by • persons in sea port towns, having friends and relations prisoners of war in France, to make inquiry whether the determination apparently in the Governments of this Country and France to prolong the severe suffer ings of prisoners of war had been occasioned by any impracticable obstacle in the way of exchange of pri soners ? It had been rumonitcl that the Prince Re gent's Government had received a communication from France on that subject, and his Lordship rose to be satisfied as to the correctness of the assertion. His. Lordship then asked, whether any proposition had been made by France to this Country, and whe ther the proposition (if any) was or was not ad missible ? He conceived it was necessary that the Noble Earl, whom he saw in his place, should an swer, and state what the particular terms of the com munication were. The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, the exchange of prisoners was an object of humanity, in which the subjects of England were deeply interested, and every feeling mind would be anxious to attain it. Endea vours had been made on former occasions to bring about an event so desirable, but unfdrtunately all efforts for some years to obtain it had been ineffec tual. On the last occasion when an attempt was made, a total failure ensued. It would be in the re collection of the House, that the silence of Parlia- went, and all those who had expressed doubts, was a fair inference that the conduct of Government was just and satisfactory. His Lordship was assured, when the nature and principles of the concessions made by his Majesty's Government were known, and also the nature of the concessions resisted. that their Lordships would say, the Government of this Country went as far as it could go to obtain the ob ject. His Lordship had no difficulty in stating, that no distinct authorised communication had been re cently made by the French Government on the sub ject of an exchange of prisoners, nor had he.the least difficulty to admit that an intimation had been made of a disposition to renew the former negociation on that subject. In answer to that intimation an answer was returned, that his Majesty's Government were ready to renew the negociation on the view before taken. His Lordship was sorry to say, that the pro positions were so unreasonable that they could not be entertained. The Noble Marquis had done him no more than justice in saying he had no wish to increase the miseries of war. They were disposed to negociate if the enemy were, but they did certainly conceive, on a subject of this nature, that negociation should stand on some principle that may not be disadvanta geous to the Country and British prisoners in future. They would always be ready to negotiate on just and ,equitable rrinciples. Lord GRENVILLE concurred with the Noble Earl in the sentiment, namely, that Government were )tiot to give way to sentiments of humanity in order Ito give the enemy unreasonable advantages, and to eitablish a principle which might be in future urged :against us. - His Lordship at the same time had to :lament, that the Noble Earl was not at liberty to state the communication, and publish to the world what were the sole grounds on which the discussion was turned and broken off. He conceived that this was not only a subject which concerned the most es sential interests of the country, but that it ought to be publicly known, and the grounds on which we stand promulgated to the world. The British long imprisoned in France had been told that their long imprisonment was owing to the obstinacy and apa thy of the Government of the country. If that was the endeavour of the enemy, no wonder if the minds of men were worked on, and it therefore became the duty of Parliament to prove to the world that not only last year, but down to the present moment, a disposition had been shewn on the part of Govern ment to lessen the miseries of men, and put an end to a state of things shameful to humanity. His Lord ship had thought that the Noble Earl had intended to give an explicit answer to his Noble Friend's pro position. If the Noble Earl conceived it improper to give it, he hoped an authentic statement would be given to the world of what had been dune. Lord LIVERPOOL said, he was bound to ob ject to a public statement, because it was not an au thorised communication, but a private intimation to renew the negotiation, and that was made with the understanding that, if it was not agreed to, it should be kept secret. As it was not acted on, Ministers did not think they were bound to publish it, well knowing that premature publication might defeat the object they had in view. In the particular shape this t proceeding took, and under all the circumstances, he had stated. It hid %. not be again entertained. Lord GREY said, ir the meaning of the tion had been made *former principle, to reject, and in such rejection, they had declared their intention to enter into a negotiation on fair and equitable principles. Lord LIVERPOOL said, he was willing to give any exphnatioa necessary. It was the same proposi tion which had been rejected on a former occasion, and his Majesty's Government were determined to stand on none but principles consistent with justice, and the honour of the country. On such terms they would be ready, on every occasion, to renew the ne gociation. Lord GREY—a His Majesty's Government re fused to negotiate on any other terms than those they had formerly proposed; but no new proposition was made i" Lord LIVERPOOL repeated, that the terms pro posed by the French Government, were the terms re jected by his Majesty's Government on a former oc casion, and that the British Government were ready to negotiate on fair principles. Lord HOLLAND observed, that both parties were extremely wrong.—Adjourned. or unless be_ , thon g 'owe of these chimerical hopes ' formerly been muerte/led by thought, for example, that , countenance or were consenting ugna. Proclamation published under the ' titre of Louis XVIII. then he should think it neces. 'stuT to bring forward a motion, not directly for . peace, but for an Address to remove those Ministers who :hewed no disposition to procure for the country a reasonable peace. Until, however, he should have , reason to suppose his Majesty's Ministers were drug inclined to peace on fair and reasonable terms, hb Should defer his motion indefinitely. Trusting always that Ministers had this object in view, he should be glad that the Nobl e L or d (Lord Castlereagh) would gave a more distinct answer respecting the concur. rence of Ministers to that Proclamation of Louis the XVIIIth ; for although be bad said that Ministers knew nothing of it, yet he was informed that those under them had afforded those facilities which Go. trernment could do to get it into circulation on the .Continent. If the Noble Lord chose to remain si lent, his silence would be considered ominous ; but if he were to disclaim it distinctly, that would indeed be highly satisfactory. Lord CASTLEI4.4GH allowed that the Hon.. Member had commented in a constitutional manner on those Petitions ; and s that he was right in saying that the Executive Government should be left unfet tered upon that subject. Whenever he should think proper to bring forward his motions, then it would be his duty to state his sentiments. At present he had only to reply to the last question of the Hon. Gentleman, as to the participation of Government in that Proclamation. With respect to the policy of 1 that measure, his Majesty's Government were not at all committed, as they were no parties to it. They did not suppose, however, that the circumstance of an asylum being granted in this count r y to t h e un -, fortunate Royal Family of France should at all fetter them, so as to prevent their exercising their own 1 judgment with respect to what was proper for them to do for their own interests and those who had been their former subjects. If, from having a residence in this country, they were to be considered fettered, this would be changing their asylum into a prison, which would be most disgraceful and discreditable to this country. As to the policy of the measure, he ' should pronounce no opinion at all about it, but merely say, that neither he nor the Government were in any degree parties to it. It was an act of State belonging to the parties who issued the Proclama tion, and not to his Majesty's Gove r nm ent . Mr. STEPHEN said, that he had not understood the Noble Lord (Lord Leveson Gower) in the man ner that he had been understood by the Hon. Gen tleman (Mr. Whitbread), as supposing that this was the.most favourable period for entering into a nego ciation. As to this proclamation of the rightful So vereign of France, it had his most cordial approba.: Or. He thought that the mild, be n i gnant , an d pa . ternil sentiments it cOntained were likely to produce the best effects. lf it produced the effec t o f s h a ki ng the established government of France to its downfall, he thought that it would bring about the only mode of a safe and honourable peace for Europe. Lord LEVESON GOWER said, that he was not aware that the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Whit bread) had at all misrepresented any thing that he had said. He certainly had not said that this was the most favourable period for negotiation, neither had he heard the Hon. Gentleman represent him as having so stated. • Mr. WHITBREAD said, that he was not sorry that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Stephen) had misunderstood him ; for other Wise he could not have avoided agreeing with him, and the House would have lost his observations. He certainly had not stated either for himself or the Noble Lord, that this was the most favourable period for negotiation. The Petition was then received. and ordered to lie on the table. Mr. WHITBREAD also presented petitions from Melburn, Greenock, Matlock, and a variety of other places, to the same effect. Those petitions having also been ordered, to lie upon the table, be expressed his hope, thal whenever any considerable number of subjects felt any pressure from the war or other grie vances, they would express their feelings to the House as those Petitioners had done, in a temperate and be coming manner. Those who endured such sufferings (which, as the Noble Lord had said, the Members of that House were strangers to), could do nothing bet ter than temperately and decorously state their case by petition to that House. He trusted the House would always be most willing to procure for them whatever relief was in their power. mu In aiirpstr ird't=ore rejected; and aion • • which misbtffer, :ained. r pow entertained some ol id, if he understoodthe Noble gait an • views which had .forme explanation was this, a pmpos‘ other Ministers. If he thou c for an exchange of prisoners ea Ministers gave any countenal which Government _were bound to the _late. Proclamation Pub HOUSE OF COMMONS. The Committee for the Cardipn Election reported, *wham Ward, Esq. was duly elected, and that the Petition was not fri volous or vexatious. Sir NEWPORT said, ha was aware what he was about to do was unusual ; but a runsour had prevailed, by which the pub lic mind had been considerably agitated. The question he had to propose was, did Ministers Intend to extend the Property Tax to Ireland, as a mean of raising the supplies of the year t Mr. W. FITZGERALD said, that the question, as had been observed by the Hon. Baronet, was certainly unusual, and he must express his disapprobation of the practice of putting ques dons across the table. But, under the present circumstances, be did not mean to extend the Property Tax to Ireland. If he was deterred from doing so, it arose from local considerations. He gave no opinion as to the propriety of the measure, but only that he bad no such intention. Sir J. NEWPORT stated, that his only motive for putting the question had been, to tranquillize the public mind, and not from any idle curiosity. Mr. W. FITZGERALD said, that he hoped for the support of the Right Hon. Barnet in the Taxes he had to propose in lieu of the Income Tax—(if tergh.) Sir J. NEWPORT said, he should be happy to give the Right Hon. Gentleman any support, consistent with his duty. Mr. M. A. TAYLOR stated his intention of bringing forward a subject involving the privileges of that House. The decision, on a recent trial at Lancaster, would naturally effect the privi leges of the Members of that House. He found no fault with the Learned Judge who had presided et that trial, but when in full possession of the facts, he should certainly bring the subjectbefore the House: PETITIONS FOR. PEACE. Lord LEVESON GOWER presented a Petition from many Master Manufacturers and callers em ployed in the Potteries of Staffordshire, representing the great distress and ruin in which many of them had been involved in the course of the present war, —He hoped the House would not only observe that this Petition was couched in the most moderate ;Ina decorous language, but that they would also bear in mind, that the conduct of those Petitioners; in all their sufferings, had been most peaceal3le and or derly. They considered all their sufferings to. have arisen from the long-protracted war ; and the reme dy which they pointed out to the House vas the re storation of peace. In this opinion he most cordi ally concurred with them ; but at the same time, the sort of peace which they called for was a safe and 1 honourable peace, and such as was consistent with the good faith by which yre were bound to our allies. 1 1 However be wished for the restoration of peace, he did not wish that any Ministers should enter into such a negociation fettered by the vote of that House. He did not see any thing in the conduct of 'Minis ters which could induce him to suppose that there was any indisposition to enter into any negociation that was likely to lead to a safe and honourable peace. He therefore should at present only wish that the Petition should lie on the table ; but as an Hon. Member (Mr. Whitbread) had given notice of a mo tion upon this subject after the recess, he thought that upon that occasion the merits of the present Pe tition, as well as of all others upon the subject, would probably be fully discussed. The Petition was then received, and ordered to lie on the table. Mr. WHITBREAD, in thing to present a Peti tion for the same purpose from a great number of the inhabitants of Leeds, wished to direct the atten tion of the House also to the moderate and temper ate language in which it was expressed. He could also, say, that the conduct of the greater part of the principal sufferers by this long and dismally-protrac ted war was peaceable in the extreme. The lan guage of the Petitioners would explain their senti ments more fully than he could do ; .he therefore wished.the Petition to be read. It having been read accordingly, he said, that it was well known, that often during the continuance of this war he had found it to be his duty either to support or to pro pose motions of a nature similar' to the prayer of those Petitions. He carried his ideas on this subject probably farther than most of the Members of that House; but still he never had called upon the House to interfere at all upon the subject, unless he concei ved Ministers to be failing in their duty of taking advantage of the most favourable periods for obtain ing peace. He was perfectly aware, that if ever a period should arrive, when the difficulties in which Ministers would have to impede them in such a ne gotiation would be the greatest, it would be at a pe riod when the table of the House should be crowded with petitions like the present. If ever then he wish ed to induce the House to take any step towards this great object, it was before they , should be borne down by the irresistible power of Petitions of this sort from all parts of the country. At an early period of this Session, when he moved an amendment to the Ad dress, and gave the notice that was alluded to, he had named no particular time for bringing on that motion, and bad since postponed it indefinitely. Events had lately happened in the North of Europe, which had considerably improved our situation and hopes, and they were still continuing to improve.-- Such an improvement could not have been anticipa ted by any one a few months ago ; but still those events appeared to throw fresh difficulties in the way of an immediate negotiation for peace. He there fore thought it right to leave the Executive Govern , ment entirely unfettered upon this subject ; nor would he bring any motion forward in the HOW* EAST•INDIA COSIMITTEE. The House having resolved itself into a Committee s Mr. GRAHAM was again called in, and examined for a very considerable time, on the subject of at tempting, even by persuasion, to convert the native Indians from the religion instilled into them by their forefathers. To a variety of questions put to him by Mr. Stephen and others on this subject, the general tendency of his answers was, that even by persuasion there would be very considerable danger. Mr. L USHINGTON (the Chairman of the Com mittee) thought it his duty to interfere. He submit. ted to the Committee how far it was proper to con. tinue in a course of investigation that was neither warranted by the Resolution of the House for going into the Committee, nor by any of the Resolutions proposed by the Noble Lord as the object of the pro ceeding. The last Resolution of the Noble Lord, which at all bore on Religion, was, that there should be two Bishops and three Sub-Deans as anEstablish ment in India. Gentlemen ought to have confined themselves to this subject only. The witness having been ordered to withdraw, Mr. STEPHEN, in explanation, said, that many of the questions he had put had arisen out of questions that had preceded, and were dictated by the answers given to them. Sir H. MONTGOMERY also explained his reasons for putting some of the leading questions. Mr. T,HOMPSON asked if they did not consider the Christian Religion superior to all others i and if so, ought they not to ascertain the obstacles to its propagation among the Flindoos ? It was on this principle that he had cross-examined the witness on the subject; and declared, that so long as questions were put in favour of heathenism ; to the discredit of that shet hive a result in fav onr o f Christianity. Mr. OCKHART thought the question at ism an unfortunate one. The subject, on the whole, was respecting an establishment in India; and surelythey 'did not mean to say, that such an establishment should be for the benefit of Europeans alone residing in In. ilia, but also of the population at large. Lord CASTLEREAGH stated, that in framing his Resolution he had really had no design of altering the religious rate of India, but had a view only to the European population. He conceived, with the Chairman, that the subject had been snfficiently ex. hanged, and that they ought not to proceed too far into detail. He did not conceive that every person who thought he might do good in a religious view s should, for that reason, be allowed to go out without any limitation or controul, nor would he wish to have any Legislative measure amoupting to a total prohi. bition. The present protracted examination, in its present aspect, was not likely to lead the Committee to any thing connected with the question. Mr. WILBERFORCE did not think that at the beginning of an inquiry, they could, with any pro priety, fiz to it a definitive bound. From .a general question, answers would arise th a t might lead te questions more in detail. The obligation of farther inquiry arose from the broad general question. They 'must either abstain from the subject altogether, or be allowed to satisfy themselves with respect to the whole of the sabirt: Sir MARK WOOD submitted to the Chair, if it might not use its discretion in preventing any clues. tion that might be thought improper, or n-t to beat OR the subject ? Mr. WILBERFORCE declared his determina tion not to be prevented from patting any question that might arise out of the answers, or that m ight lead to a better understandin g o f t h e subject. Why were the Hindoos, if practicable, not to h pm a parts. cipation of the happiness we enjoy both in this life and in that which is to come ? Sir HENRY MONTGOMERY declared himself hostile to any proceeding that would introduce these sort of people into India. Lord CASTLEREAGH did not see that the mere opinions of any person at the bar could have any great weight in determining the question as to its practicability or policy. Sir HENRY MONTGOMERY contended, that such opinions might be necessary to support the views that any Member might entertain on the subject.-- He was against interfering at all with the Hindoos in their religion, and rather than do so, he should bring forward himself Resolutions to secure to the Hindoos the exercise of their religion.--( d largh). Mr. P. MOORE said, he was very glad to find this discussion of the subject of religion had taken place, because (from a long residence in India) he knew it to be of the most vital consequence to the interests of the East India Company, and to those of the British empire, that it should be considered with the greatest care and caution. He, for his own part. was well convinced, there would be great and immi nent danger, in any attempt to interfere or tamper with the religion of the native Indians. Perhaps there were no people on the face of the earth more strongly attached to, or more deeply rooted in, their religious prejudices, than those of whom he was speaking. He remembered when he was young. in India, having a conversation with a Bramin, who said to him, " Gentlemen may take what they please from this country, only let poor Bramin gp to GOD his own way." If it was eves attempted to force the Christian religion on them, there would be no safety for any Europeans in that country. Should the natives unfortunately imbibe the idea, that it was intended, by force, to make them change their reli gion, he verily believed there would be a general massacre of the Europeans. Lord CASTLEREAGH then moved, that the witness should be called in, when Mr. THOMPSON moved, that all the questions and answers already taken down respecting the pro. pagation of Christianity in India, should be erased from the minutes of evidence. Mr. TIERNEY did not think that what had al. ready been taken down should be erased, but was of opinion they should not proceed farther on this sub. ,sect r and therefore moved that Mr. Graham be called in, and discharged from any farther attendance at 1 the Bar. Sir. H. MONTGOMERY wished to know in this case, what would become of the last Resolution pro posed by the Noble Lord ? and therefore moved, that Mr. Graham be rather called in, in order to answer what would be the political effects hi India, if such an Establishment as that proposed were to take place. (Cries of No, no.) Mr. CANNING admitted that they bad already been too particular in the examination ; but if no question, however general, such as this now proposed. was allowed to be put, be could not see what would become of the last Resolution. Either defer the question to a future discussion, or allow questions to be put, and the discretion of Gentlemen, he trusted, would prevent any improper deviation from the ge neral subject. Mr. WILBERFORCE stated, that having re. ceived a Petition from the Society of Scotland for the Propagation of Christianity, which he had presented to the House, he felt himself under an obligation to do the most to meet their views. Mr. CANNING thought his Honourable Friend might reserve the Petition for a future period, or move that the Petition be referred to the Committee. After some farther conversation, the question pro. ' posed by Sir Henry Montgomery was withdrawn, progress to be reported, and leave obtained to sit again on Wednesday next. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved, that the Minutes of Evidence taken before the House this day, be kid before the House and printed, which was ordered accordingly. Mt. R. THORNTON moved, That certain ac counts of the regulations and forms of Government, under the Bengal Establishment in India, that now exist, or may have existed, be laid before the House. Ordered. MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE SINKING FUND. Mr. TIERNEY said, the subject to which he wish• ed to call the attention of the House was highly iA• teresting. He admitted the relief from new taxes for four years to come to be in itself a benefit ; but he was extremely anxious to impreu upon the House red not a The Ha detail o Pitt, its particul, that by Pethalts debt she this sho ren and got onll themsel they we tine. conve preca its ad Sir oredii whop that to hal Fund MI 1810, Sucb liarna Bible by I appointor • that Corn the Acts report to part of tt 'lament, creditor Committ poses. l and Soli( had fillet cf that Juggestic nen con snittee Speech, the mind was conf by tl übjes Ise jects .o.th Ivoul spMft SCDt M fiirl) lawi pent of d f r "! avoi4 terta not 3