Star. — London, England, 1810-03-06 00:00:00

t on the Admiral or the i'avr, and concluded by . ing the previous question. Mr. BROUGHAM could assure the House, it, particularly his Hon. Friend [Mr. Whitbread , " several other Members had risen at t he same time wits, Mr. Brougham]—that he should not detain the House long. He had felt himself called upon to offer him .sslf to the notice of the House, by the appeal made by his Hon. and Learned Friend. His Hen. and Learned Friend had called upon Gentlemen to state what law, statute, or charter made the conduct of Lord Chatham, in presenting his Narrative to his So vereign without the privity of his colleagues, a viola tion of the Constitution. He had risen humbly to tender that answer to the House. As he felt it forci bly, it would be his fault if he did not explain it satis factorily to the House. As his Hon. and Learned Friend had introduced much extraneous matter into his speech, he should first make a few observations upon that, before he came to the immediate object of his rising. It was certainly not his wish that the son of Chatham, and the brother of Pitt, should not have justiceidone him in that House. He was ready to assent to every commendation which had been be stowed upon the general conduct and character of Lord Chatham. True it was, that Lord Chatham had been most grossly calumniated. True it was, that he had been basely traduced by the whole of the press under the controul of the Government. — True it was that every effort was made to vilify his military character, and tarnish his professional fame. His Honourable and Learned Friend and the House would recollect, that until the commence ment of this Inquiry, the impression upon the pub lic mind had been, that it was owing to Lord Chat ham that an Expedition, the most important that had ever left our shores, had failed ; that it was owing to Lord Chatham, that an enterprise, having for its ob ject the destruction of the enemy's naval force and arsenals in the Scheldt., had terminated , in failure; that the lamentable disappointment of ill the sanknine hopes of the country from an armament so powerful, was wholly owing to Lord Chatham. These were the calumnies against Lord Chatham which had pro duced the unfavourable impression against his Lord ship, whilst asserted With Emifidence, and uncontra dicted by authority. He agreed with his Hon. and Learned Friend, that it was snore dignified in that Noble Lord not to take any notice of these slanders. But it was not his intention on that occasion to go farther into that subject; in order to shew that Lord Chatham had been thus foully caltimniated. Having stated his concurrence with the opinion of his Hon. 4nd Learned Friend upon this point, it remained for him to make a few observations upon those points in which he differed from him, But lie must first remark, . that many of the observations of his Hon. and Learned Friend went directly ,in support of the arguments of those Who meant to vote for the resolutions. It was admitted that the conduct of Lord Chatham bad been iMproper and unbecoming. There *as but a trifling difference between what was thus admitted by his Hon. and Learned Friend, and what was contended for by those who supported the resolutions. The dis tinction was so minute, that he was surprised it could have produced any variation of opinion. He came next to shew how the conduct of Lord Chatham was a violation of the Constitution. The resolutions under discussion did not aver that any thing false or insidious was to be ascribed to Lord Chatham, or that he had taken advantage of easy access to his Majesty to poi son the Sovereign's ear against any man, or class of men. Whatever insinuations of that description . might hoe.been made, they had no means of coming at. They had enough, however, before them, in the Answer of his Majesty to their Address, and in the , evidienie of Lord Chatham to prove, that a Narrative 1 1 had been presented or conveyed privately to his Ma jesty, with a request that it might be kept secret. It was impossible to suppose that the Noble Lord had intended to mock his Sovereign : the Narrative must consequently have been presented with a view to im press upon his Majesty's mind some representation upon the subject to which it related. Afterwards the Narrative was taken back for the purpose of omitting a material discussion, as appeared from the evidence. This being the state of the case, there was nothing stated in the Resolutions charging any part of the contents of the Narrative as a breach of the Constitution. It yeas the privacy with which the affair v as conducted, that constituted the violation of the Constitution. It might be (difficult for him to point out any particular Act of Parliament making such conduct a violation of the Constitution ; but he could appeal to any one of , those principles of which the Constitution is made up, or rather which form the Constitution itself—(Hear, Hear.) Was it not ne cessary thatthe Constitutional Ministers of the Crown should, communicate constitutionally, and confiden tially, upon all public affairs ? Was it not requisite that they should conduct the business of the Govern ment with united Councils, and mutual advice and co-operation ? Were they not bound by every obliga tion of duty, and every principle of the Constitution, to devise in concert all the measures essential to the public interests and welfare ? And was it not neces sary that they should consult previously, in order to' an effectual co-operation afterwards, in the execution of the various measures of the Government ? Here, however, they found Lord Chatham separating him self from his colleagues, and tendering a statement to his Majesty, that is, giving his advice without consulting the other Members of the Administration. (Hear, hear.) They found him not only doing that, but coupling it with a request of secrecy ? But above all, he would ask, whether it was not necessary that they should have some person responsible for every act of the King or State ? (Hear, hear.) When the Noble Lord thus communicated his advice secretly to his Majesty, how was it possible for them to look to his Majesty's Ministers as responsible for what they knew nothing about ? Here he would remind Ids Honourable and Learned Friend who had ex pressed so eloquent an eulogium on the great Lord Chatham, that that illustrious person had pas sed his whole life in fighting the battles of the Con stitution. He it was who had denounced the exis tence of that secret influence behind the Throne, and which was greater than the Throne itself." He must also call upon the House to recollect the last act of his Ministerial existence, when he resigned his office, because he would not be responsible for measures over which he had no controul." He called upon the House to fix their attention upon that con duct, and then decide whether tile) , could pass over the present case without sonic Marked declaration of the circumstances through the examination at their bar. Lord Chatham might, if he had thought pro per, have required permission to correct his evidence: he might have, in that ease, admitted that he had previously conveyed to his Majesty a paper, which paper he had afterwards requested back for the pur pose of omitting a particular part ; and that the pa per before the House was the same as the original pa per, with the exception of that omission. Had this been done, it might have presented the case in a different light; but tio, the Noble Lord left the matter to take its course. Was such conduct justifiable or not ? The I louse would recollect the circumstances of an inquiry which took place respecting the disposal of a Seat in Parliameut so late as last Session. In that instance the Noble Lord (Castlereagh), whose share in the transaction was under discussion, had candidly admit ted that his conduct had been incautious; and it !may have been to that admission it was owing that no proceeding was taken by the House upon the sub ject. The House had, is a former night, consider ed it so alarming that a private paper should be given in to his Majesty, without the privity of his other coakidential advisers, that an Address was voted in his Majesty with a view to its production. When they recollected how they had come at the knowledge of such a paper having been presented to his Majesty —when they weighed all the circumstances of the case, and looked to the conduct of Lord Chatham— it was impossible for them to be so insensible of what , was due to their own character and dignity, as to declare by their vote, that'such conduct was in the slightest degree justifiable. Upon these grounds, he should feel himself bound to vote for the Resolutions • Mr. STEPHEN observed, that the question then really before the House was, whether the House of Commons should pronounce Lord Chatham guilty of a violation of the Constitution Under all the cir cunastances of the case, and pending . the inquiry then in r•-ogress, notwithstanding the situation of Lord Chatham as a Cabinet )(mister and Commander in Chief, he must say, that he had heard no argument to induce him to agree to so serious a censure as was contained in the Resolutions. He was convinced it would be impossible for the House to agree to thee.. Resolutions, because if it should, it would then be bound, in order to be consistent with itself, to proceed to measures which would terminate the public life of Lord Chatham. Before he could proceed to that length, he must be acquainted with the nature of the charge, and 'the circumstances of the case. In the premises as laid in the first Resolution, he did not find any thing that could be considered a foundatibn for the censure contained in the latter. Nothing that was false or insidious was charged against the state ment of the Noble Lord ; neither had it been asserted that he had poisoned the ear of his Majesty against the navy. The mere abstract proposition, that the statement had been secretly given to his Majesty, was all the charge rested upon : and upon such an ab stract proposition he would not admit that Lord Chatham had Violated that sacred system, the British Constitution. He was persuaded that the conduct of Sir Richard Strachan was perfectly blameless and correct ; but even'that feeling should not induce him to condemn Lord Chatham. If even the premisei of the resolutions were correct, he should contend that they involved no violation of the British Constitution. In what law or charter, he would ask, of British rights, in what writer or theorist upon either, was It stated that to present a statement to the King, was, on the part at a Privy Councillor, a violation of the Constitution? (Hear, hear.) He would again assert tliat there was no such law, and that no precedents Were to be found in their journals in support of such a doctrine. He was prepared, however, to state his opi nion candidly, that in presenting his statement, as he had done, the conduct of LordChatham was erroneous, improper, and unbecoming : but it was no violation of the Constitution. Every thing that was dangeroas to the Constitution was not a violation of it. Luxury rams dangerous to the Constitution of a state ; yet no man would contend that to give a sumptuous and magnificent entertainment would be a violation of *e Constitution.—( Lord law:ker.) Gentlemen were merry, but he would give them another illustration. Party spirit and factious combinations were danger ous to the Constitution—rime/ cries of hear, hear !) He had here touched the string which vibrated velth most elasticity in the breasts of the Gentlemen oppo site; but he was quite sure that these Gentlemen would not contend that either was a violation of the Constitution. 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. Ile considered Lord Chatham as hardly dealt by, and much injured, and expressed sorro* for having participated in the unfavourable impression of his conduct, produced by the calumnies with which • h:s 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, could not haie done,more. He could not, therefore, admit of presumptions against Lord Chat ham, who had certainly some hereditary claims to the a ttention of that House. What would be the effect of agreeing to the Resolutions, if not to stop the course of the pending inquiry ?—fLosid cries of hear , hear. ) When he had last addressed the House , he had expe rienced the same acclamations and 0. P. arguments. .—eii /aiii4)—a course of proceeding resorted to by the Gentlemen opposite, instead of meeting him with fair reasoning or sound argument.. At first it was neceisary for the salvation of the country that the In quiry should be continued freer') day to day. Now, however, when it was found that the evidence would net bear out the inferences of these Gentlemen— ( Thee, hear,) —this episode was introduced, calculated, no doubt, to hurry on the catastrophe, in part at least, because if the Gentlemen opposite could not turn out all the Cabinet, they expected to turn out one by this Tiroceeding. He contended, that to vote the Resolu tions would be to punish Lord Chatham, whilst the 'merits of the Expedition would he afterwards to be enquired into. The Honourable and Learned Gen tternan then adverted to the merits and services of the father and brother of Lord Chatham, and called upon the Hotise to do justice to the son of Chatham, and the brother of Pitt. He besought Gentlemen, not by • any invidious contrasts, to pluck stones from the mo nument of the father to bruise the head of the son. The Hoaourable and Learned Gentleman next eon leteded,"that the Narratite contained no reflection up- Contents were permitted to be reeelated by ? If such a practice wure to '" prevail, lie indeed tremble for the country. He could not of its dy for him more dangerous situation of thin aey cases; bto sye, declaring Commons aring t h a that should to be alsasxuvm which the h i g h p othtshvae: the} ease. if an . :apricio . so to declare on an immediate view rat one Minister, under , and without reference to any other autho suppose that the tillery ; another case ) bra coin-tic the preference to a division of light horse. Every rity. was an incontrovertible principle of the - one might have a different opinion, and all agree entetion e that that could not be unconst tonal itttc con. only in one thing, that their advice should be kept against which the Constitution possessed tare guard, glue and secret in the possession of his Majesty. — Ministers were responsible for any act of Crown • Could any Gentleman conceive a greater degree but for advice not carried into action they were not of confusion worse confounded than would result responsible. The law did not allow that tey should from such a state of Ministerial separation It had be responsible. Merely, therefore, to offer advice to been argued by his Honourable and Learned Friend, the. Sovereign was not unconstitutional, because the that as the inquiry was not yet brought to a conclu. Constitution did not afford any guard against such lion, it was impossible for the House to come to any a circumstance by rendering the individual who of. .decision upon this question ; but he must remind the fered it responsible. The Noble Lord s a a s a ac P te e d er u a p n o d n House, that the charge against Lord Chatham , for a Privy Councillor , had a right to have access to his the secrecy of this unconstitutional proceeding , form - Majesty. If the adv i ce conve y ad t o his Majesty's ed a wholly distinct and entire act , the decision up on ear was acted up on, it could only be Which could have no effect whatever upon the pro- constitutionally through the medium of a responsible gress or termination of the inquiry. They had the Minister. There was the check. Tirol was the pro: admission of Lord Chatham, and the answer of his per and constitutional responsibility. It afracto him Majesty to establish the fact ; and he should wish to by whom the act was done, not him by when; this know, whether, if they were to rejtct the resolutions, advice might have been given. The former was os. there would not be an end of all responsibility on the tensible ; the latter it might be difficult to trace. In part of his Majesty's Ministers. It was in a spirit of the course of the present discussion, and of former fairness to the colleagues of Lord Chatham, 'that he discussions on subjects connected with it, a great deal called upon the House to agree to the resolutions— had been said of secret influence. At an early pe r i o d for it would be injustice to them to hold them res- of his life, on the commencement indeed of his poll ponsible for what they were not acquainted with. He tical life, he had also heard a great deal about secret should call upon the House, therefore, to support influence. At that period he hid not the means of e these Resolutions, in justice to the principles of the knowing whether the clamour was true orase. Th e , illustrious Statesman, father of the Noble Lord, had 'Constitution, in fairness to his Majesty's Ministers from a regard to the honour et the Crown, in secu- unquestionably given to that clamour the stamp of ring from violation that insuperable barrier, which his great authority, and had rendered it more cur. guards the personal inviolability of the Sovereign, rent. From many persons however, who were well by casting the responsibility of all his acts upon qualified to judge upon the subject, he had he;u'd his advisers. He had to apologize to the House for much disbelief expressed as to the existence of eeis having taken up so much of its time ; and for the tea- secret influence. He really did not himself possess sons he had stated, should vote for the Resolutions. the means of ascertaining its existence ; but even if Mr. BANKES deemed the present a question of it did exist, the constitution afforded nu remedy great moment. It had occurred to him even before ageinst it. If there were Ministers so base as to h o ld he entered the House, that he ought to pause before responsible situations wider irrespons ble advisers, he gave his opinion, and to consider deliberately whe- however great the clamour might be against those ther the Noble Lord, whose conduct was condemned advisers, and even however great the mischief that in the Resolutions before the House, had been guilty their advice might occasion, the Constitution afforded of any practice which justified the term unconstitu- ,no means by which they could be punished; the respell. tional, as applied to that conduct. He had listened 'sible Ministers alone being liable by the Constitution to very attentively to the Learned Gentleman who had' punishment for the acts committed by them. At the just sat eleven, and who, he presumed, had collected same time he begged to disclaim any approbation of all that could be said in support of the argument such underhand transactions.. But it was indispensi. which he had mentioned. To what did that all ble to see what the Constitution was upon the subject, amount ? The Learned Gentleman was of opinion and by the Constitution to abide; If his Majesty's that the conduct of Lord Chatham had been uncon- responsible Ministers were guilty of improper con stitutional, and this opinion he declared that he duct, the House of Commons might address his Ma lted dedueed from all the known principles of the jesty to remove them ; but no address of the House -Constitution. The Learned Gentleman had stated could touch any individual who was not a responsii)le it as,one of those known principles, that the Members Minister. Recurring to the case in question, be con of the Cabinet Council should act in concert. Now tended that if the charge against the Noble Lord is the fact was, that the existence of a Cabinet Council the proposed resolutions was not distinctly made oat was unknown to the Constitution. In old times, the —if it was not proved that his conduct had been Privy Councillors were 'the Constitutional advisers clearly unconstitutional—nay, if there was the slight of his Majesty; although it was true that in modern est doubt upon the subject, it would be an act of the times, owing to an occurrence originating in a cabal, greatest injustice to adopt a motion involving in it a certain number of those Privy Councillors were some serious consequences to the party accused. It ' usually formed into a body, and called the Cabinet was by the Noble Lord's wish that his narrative had Council. And here he would remark, that when he been moved for and presented to the House. That agreed, on a recent evening, to the Address telative narrative had certainly placed his Lordship in an in to the production of any farther Narrative of Lord convenient situation. If he had instead been ex- Chatham's, it was not on the general grounds of con- amined at the Bar on the points to which it related, his stitutieinal necessity stated by the Moyer of that Ad- statements in his own defence would perhaps have been dress. His reason for concurring in the Motion of moreexcusable; and after all, the narrative only stated the Address was, that.the House having thought fit what the Noble Lord had done, and called upon the to require the production of one narrative, and there other service to explain the circumstances of which he appearing a suspicion that a prior narrative was in was ignorant. It would indeed be most unjust, it for existence, he could see no cause, as the second narra- any error of judgment in the mode of doing this, the tine had been produced, why the first ought not to be Noble Lord should be subjected to a censure so demanded. He could by no means understand on heavy as that which the proposed Resolutions con- What principle of the Constitution the Learned Gen- veyed. If any additional proof were requisite that *man founded his doctrine, that one of the confiden- the individual advice of a Minister to his Sovereign tial advisers of his Majesty, recognized as'such, ought was not unconstitutional, it might be found in the not to have access to his Sovereign to tender any ad- conduct, on a certain occasion, of a man too warmly vice that he might think proper. If such an indivi- attached to the Constitution to violate it ;he meant dual were to take this step without the knowledge of Mr. Pitt, who, on that occasion, was closeted with his colleagues, to them it might be .an offence, but his Majesty while his Colleagues were kept in the certainly none to the Constitution. After the Expe- anti-room. dition had terminated, and Lord Chatham's functions Mr. STEPHEN explained. He by no means as Commander in Chief had ceased, had not the No- called on the House not to proceed against the Noble ble Lord a right, as a Constitutional adviser of his Lord for the sake of his father and his brother; he Majesty, and holding the high situation which he did had only said that the words of William Earl of in the government of the Country, to demand an au o Chatham ought not to be quoted to aggravate the diente of his Sovereign, for the purpose of rendering accusation against his son, and he had only conjured to him an account of his proceedings ? Would not those who venerated that illustrious character, and the Noble Lord have had a right to do this by word who were attached to, and had been obliged by Mr. of mouth ? Not only had he a right to do so ; but he Pitt, to assist his feeble efforts in the defence of the .would have been culpable had he not done so. If Noble Lord against the stream'of party spirit, and to then he had a right to give his Majesty advice and rescue him from the grossest injustice. information by word of mouth, what was there in Mr. G. JOHNSTONE said, that he came down the character of a written, and therefore of a more to the House satisfied with a conviction that the con- . detailed and accurate statement by which such a duct of the Noble Lord demanded the adoption re right was abrogated? With respect to the motives some serious resolutions. But the speeches of h s which induced the Noble Lord to withdraw his first Learned Friend (Mr . S te p hen ) , of whose judgment - statement, for the purpose of returning it in an amen- and talents, lie had the highest opinion, and of the ded form, the House had net the means of judging. Learned Gentlem an opposite, although very differen .. t It was probable that they would have known more from each other , led him t o doubt the accuracy of hn, on this subject, had it not been for the interruption own judgment upon the q uestion. He certainly did which had occurred in the examination of the Noble not conceive that the conduct of the Noble Lord hed Lord ; but, even were those motives criminal, the been more unconstitutional than th e conduct of the Ge n - a was not against the Constitution. It might be late Duke of Portland and a Right Honou rable a very heinous moral crime, but no such crime was tleanan now out of office, with respect to the secret charged in the resolutions before the Howe. No- advice given by them , a nd affecting a Noble Lords thing could be more dangerous than to charge an in- who was their colleague. His idea of the affair wa: dividual with a crime, the nature of which was not that Lord Chatham had acted improperly, no t as distinctly and decisively described, but which was left Cabinet Councillor, but as a General of an army' t to be interpreted as circumstances might require. He and he wished that some resolutio n should be a p . e,d_ did not utter this opinion because the Noble Lord to prevent the recurrence of such a proceedinerf was descended from one of the most illustrious states- was not prepared to agree to the strong' roe, r.Ltiooins. men, or because he was the brother of one of the best proposed, which went to disable the Noble d , friends that the country had ever enjoyed. If the in- from serving his Majesty in future. To th e entn dividual whose conduct was under consideration was he would not go. He had not tile ltanour bei n g one of the meanest subjects in 'the reaim he would much known to Lord Chatham• he saoulS still, contend that it was an intolerable grievance to. for the peculiar circumstances of the case, _ o , charge him as the Resolutions charged the Noble not have boasted of being at all known to the , is: 1 : i : Lord. The Resolutions, if agreed to, would throw Lord hi would say, that every one w"uost on the Noble Lord's character a stigma most injuri- the honour of being acquainted with him, m ount!' ous to him as a public man. If agreed to, how aware that of the various public men in the c ought they to be followed up ? Unquestionably the no one was more eminent for candour, fairness, r e ; House ought to address his Majesty to remove from sincerity. In the proceeding which he had ad o oe r. Were it not :1,1. his Council a man whom they had previously de- - the Noble Lord ;oust have been led into an the re sole , dared to be an abuser of the Royal ear, and a vio- was sure that the Honourable Mover of tai lator of the Constitution. The Constitution was a tionsnvould not believe in his cooler ninine ' '?t. s s large book, which every man reattnn his own way. Lord Chatham's narrative was. presented tovt In what state would the country be if tit* interprets- jesty. with dark, malignanto and insidious vie uneonsitutional teatwitr'rirtit% un- tion of its or n to take up their nine by pointlig party feeling ut 511': the argument he wouldisuppote should inde& n Expedition were determined upon, conceive a n der the influence of this system? might that the Hou object waste be best attained by an , of capricious) by infantry, another (as in the late might . chuse_ -dc-main, whilst another might give - the - ease, an,