The Statesman. — London, England, 1824-02-18 00:00:00

• • UTE STATESMAN but there was a distinct indication of a hostile feeling. Did Sir William A'Court withdraw himself from the Spanish (Averment in consequence of instructions from. home'? If not. considering he had withdrawn himself under such circumstances and at such a moment, when perhaps the fate of Spain might have hinged on the conduct of this country, why was be not recalled, reprimanded,—nay, why was he not even impeached? If it was in consequence of instructions, then, contrary to all our notions, contrary to all our engage ment., contrary to our pledged faith, this country declared a hostile feeling against Spain ; and why ? because the Cortes of the country in the legal exercise of Utheir un questionable authority, declared the king to be for a time incapable of exercising the Royal function, and appointed a Regency: but for this special and only purpose of chang ing the seat of Government to Cadiz, with provision for the resumption by the king of his full power, on the arrival of the Government. In that act the Cortes was in a the exer cise of its legal and undoubted authority. What country or Parliament would question the legality of such an act as this P Did we forget the Act of our own Parliament in 1810? He felt the delicacy of adverting to that subject; and Goa forbid be should for one moment think of intro ducing in the same sentence the name of our late revered Sovereign—at the close of a long reign—struck with the heaviest calamity that could Aid our nature—with the name of a wretch who still unfortunately lived, the scourge of his people—(hear) , for all they had, done, and for all they had forborne to do—(hear). the most finished specimen that existed in human nom of all that was base and truckling, of all that was perfidious, bloody, and perjured, and therefore a very fit object for the collected sympathies of the other side of the house.—(hear) It was the duty of this Parliament to appoint a Regency. Had the Cortes of Spain the same power or had they not? and was Sir W. A'Court a fit judge of the circumstances under which the Cortes of Spain were to exercise that power? If in 1810 the Minister of any Foreign Court had withdrawn himself from London, stating the Regency Bill as his vindication for such an act, and that he was ac credited not to the Regency, but the king of England, should we not have considered such Minister either insane or as having received instructions from his Court. The Corms were not assembled by their own power, declaring the throne to be vacant, and they only declared the King for a time incapacitated from exercising the Royal func tions, appointing a Regency for the solo purpose of changing the seat of Government, and providing for the King's immediate restoration. But by this Sir W. A'Court abandoned the Government, this following a very short time after the three famous notes of the three Allied Powers, England io the person of Sir Wm. A'Court follow ing in the train of those three Powers, whose principles she had disclaimed, and against whose conduct she bad protested. Ministers could not have been insincere and base enough to have authorized such an act. At the same time we bad not seen Sir Wm. A'Court recalled to answer these charges. But he did not wish to enter more par ticularly into the conduct of Sir Wm. A'Contt in this trans action. A much better opportunity would be given by the production of the correspondence with the Spanish Government for taking a fair view of his conduct; but this he (Lord N.) would say, he always contrived to place himself in a position from whence he must have known that mediation was impracticable. He allowed the time to pass away after the Spanish Government had left Seville, until, by the blockade and investment of Cadiz, he must have known that mediation was impracticable. Where was Sir Wm. A'Court from the period, and it was not a short one, of the Government leaving Seville to the time of the investment and blockade of Cadiz 1 He was at Seville with the French army, the Army of the Faith, and the servile party—at Seville, where he must have known the full effect of the countenance which he was then giving by his presence to the servile party—at Seville, where, as an instance of the effect produced on the minds of that party, no less extraordi nary a proposition was made to Sir Wm. A'Court by an Wu elated and sanguinary mob headed by priests, than that Sir Wm. A'Court would consent to be made by them Governor of Seville in the name of the absolute King. The Ambassador declined that offer. stating that if so mad and monstrous a pro position should be repeated, be must leave Seville. Why did he remain one hour at Seville with the French army, the Army of the Faith, the Priests, and mob? Ile must have known, seen, and felt the full effect which his presence was producing —namely, an impression that his country was taking a decided part against the Constitutional Government of Spain ; and yet this is the profession of our intention, inclination, end wish at any moment to come forward'with an offer of mediation and friendly support towards Spain. But what was the immediate effect of this conduct 'I That the hint which Sir Wm. A'Court had thus apparently and very intelligibly given, was immedi ately taken by the French Army, and every traitor in Spain from one end of the country to the other. That whatever might have been their doubts and difficulties before, the Army immediately advanced, hlorillo immediately deserted, stating by a public proclamation that the grounds for his conduct were the steps Sir Wm. A'Court had taken ; giving Sir William A'Court's conduct as the vindication of his own treason to his country. lie (Lord N.) was bound to believe Sir W. A'Court meant well, charitably and generously, in the various attempts he made on more than one occasion to persuade the Spanish Generals to withdraw themselves from Spain. A communica tion had been made to a person of whose conduct end gallant and unimpeachable fidelity it was impossible to speak in terms of (adequate admiration Geo. Alava, who was intimately con• 1 mewed with the era of the Spanish Revolution. lie never ex• pressed any strong concurrence in the abstract principle of the Constitution itself, but he felt nobly and honestly that from the moment Spain was threatened with a foreign attempt to change her inatitutions,the cause became united with thatof the country. Therefore, faithful to that honest and loyal principle, he nobly withstood all the temptations and persuasions held out to him to save his own most valuable life from the wreck of his wretched country. And who was the person who endeavoured to persuade Gen. Alava to save himself from the sinking cause of his country by secretly with drawing? It was Sir Wm. A'Court, who, no doubt, did this upon the principle of the purest generosity, from the purest attachment to the person of General Alava, and the warmest admiration of his patriotism, but at the same time Sir William A'Court Must have forgotten, %hat General Alava did not forget, that the withdrawing such a person at such a time from Cadis, could not but have had the effect of hastening the fall of Spain—at all events, he ex cepted his character from the reproach short of indelible infamy, which had blasted the characters of Abisbal, Mo rino, and Ballasteros. What would be the answer so this? That Sir William A'Court's conduct could be referred to nothing but a wish to save one of the best men in Spain, who, by his connection with British achievements, had become a peculiar object for the sympathy of this country; but was it fair, or within the duties of Sir William A'Court, who bad always kept studiously aloof from co-operation with the Constitutional Government, who had placed himself in a distant position—who had maintained a cold silence—who was the non-conducting medium between the last sigh of expiring Spain and the sym pathies of this country—was it his duty to run the risk, even for the sake of saving so valuable a man as General Alava, of striking the last blow to the expiring cause of Spain ? There were one or two circumstances deeply af fecting this ease, which the house might not be aware of. Ministers would not contradict that overtures were made, at Madrid, to Sir W. A'Court, on the part of the Cortes, offering to recognise the independence of South America upon terms the most adyaotageons. We rather preferred to risk all differences which might accrue he. tween us and an Absolute King, and which might yet, be fore a twelvemonth was over, plunge us in a war with all Europe. The Cortes had repealed the ancient Spanish law of restriction upon foreign commerce. They had acknow ledged,ln the most frank and liberal manner, the claims of British merchants, and provision was made for the liquida tion of those claims. Of that we bad assurance last year, and received the congratulations of his Majesty. These were offered as an earnest of the desire of Spain to make the mediation of this country not only an object of Yuma. pity, andjustice, but of indubitable advantage. We ne glected these opportunities for the sake of gratifying the Holy Alliance and restoring the absolute Monarch, and and those hellish and murderous positions which were un kennelled when he was allowed to leave Cadiz, to allow him to pluck away all those whose crimes had been to give free institutions to their country, such as was recoenised i a 1812. The rest of what we conceded to France might be shortly stated. A blockade was allowed to be formed of a nature such as we, in the very meridian of our maritime power, mistress as we were of the seas. had never attempt ed. Not only commerce was excluded, but the seat of Go vernment itself was invested, by which Ministers were ex cluded from all political communication with a friendly power. This was a case such as, in the zenith of our mari time power, we had never called on any State to recognize; but it was now conceded without remonstrance to the more successful ambition of France. The right ofsearch, under circumstances that could not be justified by any. pretext of necessity or caution, had been allowed. English merchant vessels were boarded, searched, and detained under every circumstance of violence and insult. Their Captains, in more than one instance,prisoners on the deck of the French vessels, and that, not in the neighbourhood of Cadiz, but at sea—in some instances more than a degree of western longitude from Cadis. English vessels, to the ruin of their owners, were detained, which had entered Cadis, and taken cargoes on board before the blockade wiz declared. They had not the means of applying to any authority, and when an application was made to the French Admiral they were refused under every circumstance of incivili ty and insult. It may be asked, why were not repre sentations made to the proper authorities ? He would tell them, because our Ambassador, instead of remaining to pro feet the British interests at Cadis, bad gone to Gibraltar —because there was no body there to whom repre sentations could be made, except an English merchant, who was, in the character of a vice consul, acting without authority, and not possessing the means of protection. He knew not what were the feelings of the House upon this subject, but be would detail to them a circumstance which they could not hear without mingled feelings of disgust and shame; feelings which he could not help avowing on witnessing a transaction connected with a subject which had always been the peculiar boast of this country. Mr. Appleton, the Charge d'Affaires of America, at Cadiz, felt it his duty to protest against the detention of two Ameri can vessels in that port, and two English Merchants, whose vessels were in the same predicament, seeing that there was no authority there to protect their interests, and bay ing ' no other resource, went to the American Charge d'Affaires, and begged of him to extend his protection to them, and include the detention of their vessels in his pro test. So English merchant, were obliged to entreat the protection of an American Charge d'Affaires against the conduct of the French ! Was it to be endured that Bri tish commerce should be so neglected—that it should have no protection against the outrage of a foreign nation ? For America he felt the deepest concern.—Of America, their brethren, springing from the same origin with them selves, he should never speak but with feelings of the greatest respect and warmest interest. With America and England, linked together in the bonds of amity and feeling, he trusted the day would come—for come it would and he hoped it was not far distant—when the liberty of the world would find a resting place. Still, though pos sessed of these feelings, he, as an Englishman, could not be free from jealousy at seeing British commerce, when outraged by France, obliged to fly for protection to an American Charge d'Affaires. And why was this so—to what cause could it be attributed ? To none, in his opi nion, but that inglorious policy which England had pur sued in the late contest between France and Spain. But this has not been the only result of this policy as it con cerned England. Look at the ports of Spain with all those of strength or commerce in the hands of the French, and, as lie was credibly informed, French shipi were al lowed duty free into all the ports, while every means were taken to exclude the British, with Malaga, Cadiz. Bar celona, and Carthegena, garrisoned by French troops— Malaga and Carthagena, which were so loqg almost exclu sively confined to British commerca—Cadiz, the best situ ation in Spain for a large navy—Carthagena, the finest bat bour in that kingdom—so tine, that according to the Spanish proverb there were but three good harbours in Spain, Jane, July, and Carthagena—and Barcelona, th e key of Spain ; all these were now in the possession of France, which made it lamentable to reflect, that all the blood we had shed to rescue that country from the bands of the French, in the late wit-, was shed in vain. Even the contraband trade of Gibraltar was cut off, fur which alone it was useful to England in time of peace, and the Family Compact, which had been one of the grounds of a contest in which this country was formerly engaged, was again restored on its firmest basis, and all the objects for which we had ever fought or bled, were gratuitously abandoned. Let the Constitution have perished—let France have commenced an unjustifiable aggression—let Liberty have expired, and the brst blood of Spain had been sited, still it was the bounden duty of England to have prevented Spain from becoming a province of France. To this duty she was called by wisdom, honour, and policy, and it was because he felt all these had been overlooked—it was be cause he felt our interest had been neglected, our engage ments abandoned, and our honour tarnished. that lie rose to move for the production of papers which would furnish some information upon the subject. There was one docus ment which he did not include in his motion, as lie was not aware that it was presented to the Right Hon. Secretary. It was sent a few days before the surrender of Cadiz, by the Spanish Government to Admiral Hubert, with a request that it should be laid before the Foreign Secretary—it was a protest against the conduct of Sir W. A'Court. If in the course of his speech he had spoken warmly, be hoped the House would pardon him, as it was a subject in which his feelings were deeply interested. The Noble Lord conclu ded by moving , " that a bumble Address be presented to his Majesty, praying that his Majesty be graciously pleas ed to direct that copies be laid before the House of all the instructions sent by his Majesty's Government to Sir W. A'Court, his lilejristy's Plenipotentiary to the Court of Spain, with a viewto ascertain his conduct in the late war between France and Spain. from the period of the first en trance of the French troops to Spain, up to the surrender of Cadiz 1 and also copies of all correspondence between his Majesty's Plenipotentiary at the Court of Spain, and the Spanish Government, relative to the mediation of Great Britain during the same period." Mr. CANNING said that be merely rose, if he was not out of order, to answer two questions of the Noble Lord, without at all intending to go into a speech, and as these questions related to the conduct of Sir W. A'Court, he would confine himself to that point. The Noble Lord asked him if Sir W. A'Court, in his conduct during the late contest between France and Spain, acted upon the instructions of his Majesty's Government or his own discretion? His answer was, that he acted partly on both. Government endeavoured to foresee the events that might arise, and instructions were forwarded to Sir Wm. A'Court, with the view of meeting them. But in case any event should arise which his Majesty's Government had not foreseen, Sir WM. A'Court was instructed to act as in his opinion the occasion might require, his Majesty's Government placing the fullest assurance on his discretion, and should any event arise in which he found himself placed in a situation of doubt or perplexity. he (Mr. Canning) had in timated to him the expediency of going to Gibraltar, where be might still communicate with the Spanish Go vermin's'. and from which, after awaiting the instructions of his Majesty's Government, he might be able to repair to any place where his presence was deemed necessary. However, a case did occur. which, as he did not mean to argue now, be would not qualify —a case which the wit of man, could not have foreseen, namely, the depo *Won of a King for a limited peridd. To have foreseen such an event, and to have given instructions to meet it, would indeed have been a higk demand upon the sa gacity of Ministers and the faculty of the imagination. After the King's departure from Seville, Sir William A'Court waited there for some time for instructions, and it was true, as stated by the Noble Lord, that an attempt wa% made by the factious party at Seville, to construe his residence to party purposes, and make it an instru ment of their designs; and it was then that Sir William A'Court, seeing such a construction put on his remaining at Seville, teok himself to St. Lucar, and there embarked for Gibraltar. On the seat of Government quitting th a t Place, Sir William A'Court said that he should not follow it, and intimated to the then Minister of Foreign Affairs, that he would remain as near as possible in order to com municate with the Spanish Government, and with that view would go to Gibraltar, where he would wait till in structions could reach him from his Government ; but if none came, that be would act upon his own discretion ; thus —that if his removing to Cadiz would conduce to the per sonal safety of the King, or if the King were restored to the exercise of his functions, ke would go. In the mean time instructions went out from Government to Sir W. A'Court, not to enter a bhickaded place, and he therefore continued his residence at Gibraltar. In this Sit William A'Court acted upon the instructions of his Majesty's Go vernment, and if any imputation was cast upon them, he was prepared to justify their conduct, bat would not have risen now, but that he thought it right to exculpate Sir W. A'Court from the charge made against him. Mr. STURGES BOURNE said, that before the House could assent to the motion of the Noble Lord, they ought to know the whole extent of the question which it involv ed. It was nothing less than charging the King's Go vernment with being guilty of a breach of neutrality in the late contest between France and Spain, and he must confess that this was the first time he heard such an imputa tion cast upon them. He did not expect that the Noble Lord would have stamped the policy which this country bad adopted in that contest with such epithets as lee had used. The Noble Lord stigmatised that policy as inglo rious, but with what justice that epithet was used, the House must be aware, when it was acknowledged from one end of the country to the other, that the exertions of Go vernment to prevent a war and preserve the blessings of pearewere highly beneficial to the interests of the country Could it be forgotten that if we hail engaged in that war we would have had almost all our allies ranged against us, and lighted up a general war in Europe. in addition to our hav ing to combat, as the event justified Ilains in saying, with the great part of the population of Spain ? He would just take the liberty of making a few conjectures on what would be the probable consequence of our making common cause with Spain. If they had engaged in that contest, they must have acted either as principals or auxiliaries, and in either case they would have to fight in the field with such men as Abisbal. Ballasteros, and Ilorillo. But, he asked, would an English Army act under the command of that consummate General who brought the former war to so glorious a termination ? Experience would tell them. — It would be recollected, that after the battle of Salamanca, as late as 1512, when the Duke of Wellington was no no• vice in Spain, and had already rescued from the grasp of France a great part of what she bad obtained either by vio lence or fraud—when in the full tide of victory. and that he had been invested with the chief command of the Spa nish Government—at that moment, when a man of princi ple or intergrity would have been only inspired with in creased zealßallasteros abandoned the cause of his country, and so crippled the operations of the Misrule, army. that in consequence of that defection, Soult wintered in dladrid instead of the Duke of Welliagton. Did the Noble Lord think that the same spirit of disaffection would not have manifested itself if we had again made common cause with Spain, particularly when circumstances were more favour able to it front the divided state of Spain? It was hardly necessary for hint to trespass further upon the house, fur they must all be aware how disadvantageous it would be to carry on a war under such circumstances and with such Commanders. Indeed, there was but one opinion on the subject from one end of the country to the other, and it was in vain to dwell longer upon it. He would now come to the charges of the noble Lord against Sir W. A'Court for a breach of neutrality, and he could not help expressing his astonishment at the causes assigned for that imputed breach. The first accusation was, that Sir William A'Court did not proceed to Cadia with the Spanish Government. and this the Noble Lord gravely called a breach of neutrality. This part of the charge was answered in one word. Sir William A'Court was appointed Ambassador to the King of Spain. Such was the purport of his credentials. The King of Spain was seised at Seville and deposed. This being the case Sir William A'Court's credentials became inoperative. and he could recognise no other power without fresh in structions. This, if any thing, was rather a proof of neu trality; if Sir William A'Court had acted otherwise, his Majesty's Government would not have done their duty if they had not recalled him. The King of Spain being de pond —whether right or wrong, was not now the question, the existence of a King ceased, and Sir William A'Court went to Gibraltar, where an application was made to him on the part of the Spanish Government for his mediation. The second accusation of the Noble Lord—and which in deed was the weakest part of the charge of a breach of neutrality—was that he gave advice to a distinguished Spa nish trenerel—a man whom he believed merited all the encomiums passed on hino.Whether the advice which he gave to General Alan was discreet or indiscreet, he knew not, but that advice might have been given more as a private friend, than in his official capacity as Minister, and in any case, he did not see bow it could be construed to a breach of neutrality. The third ground of the Noble Lord's charge was, that this country allowed the blockade of Cadiz. Was a third power to prevent two belligerent powers from exer cising the right of blockade, and above all was it in that house f Was it before the British Parliament. which had always so strictly maintained the right of blockade between two Belligerent powers,—(hear,) that our abstaining from interference, could be. brought forward as an argument to support a Wench of neutrality? Let them be honourable and honest at the same time, and not sacrifice principle to con venience. He was aware that the Noble Lord might draw the distinction that Cadiz was the seat of Government, but he should recollect that the possestioa of it was there fore more important to the enemy. The Noble Lord's doctrine upon this was quite new ;.and certainly this coun try was the last which should question the right of block ade. As to the interference of the American Charge d'Affaires to which the Noble Lord alluded, it was a mete act of courtesy on his part. These were the three grounds upon which the Noble Lord called for most important do cuments, in which were contained the secret instructions of Government to oar foreign Ministers. His reasons for the production of these papers were so slight s that be knew they could not be induced to consent to his motion, and lay them before the house, which would, in fact, be laying them before alt Europe. If there was really a breach of neutrality, both the house and the country must have known it ; and in that case the Noble Lord would have been justified in calliugfor 'the papers in question ; but at the present he bad not the slightest pretence fur their pro duction. It was worth while to examine the course of our neutrality, and see what disposition his Majesty's Govern ment had to violate it towards Spain. How did our neu trality commence? Did it not commence with a commu nication to Spain, that this country had determined to be neutral, while we concealed it from France. Was not this, if any thing, rather a proof of partiality to Spain? This country then tenaered its mediation, which was re fused. It afterwards offered its counsel, but it was onfor tuaately rejected, though be believed there was no man who beard him, who would not now say, that Spain would have hada freer and a better Constitution, if it 11.1.1. k ec accepted.—(Hear, hear.)—These circumstance, did n o % however, prevent Sir Wm. A'Court from still tenderi ng his services; but his efforts were unfortunately of no avail. In preserving a strict neutrality, Government had many difficulties to contend with, one of which was the military spirit that had grown up in this country, and the disposi, tton to assist the Spaniards, which bad induced some of his Majesty's subjects to engage in actual hostilities with France. In his opinion Governinent bad pursued a manly and straight forward course, of which both the house a n d the country approved, and it was under that conviction that he would m lye as an amendment—"'That the hou se is duly sensible of the advantages derived to the country from the neutrality in the late contest between France and Spain, which his Majesty declared it his determination to observe; and that it appears to this house that under c it .. camstances of great perplexity and difficulty, that oeutrl. lity had been inviolably observed." After some pause, the gallery was ordered to be cleared for a division, when Lord NUGENT rose to reply. The Noble Lord otr,sraeitll. *bat he had only two words to offer in reply t o t h e oh. "servations of the Honourable Member who spok e l ast. He thought that the Right Honourable Gentleman had mis taken the drift of what he (Lord Nugent) iwi As to the amendment, it is nothing more than a recogni tion of the vote of last year, approving of the &termination of Government in observing a strict neutrality. He had no right to quarrel with the Right Honourable Gentleman forditfering in opinion with him, but still he did not think that he was very satisfactory in some of his arguments. The Right Honourable Gentleman supposed that the me diation offered last year was simply an offer of medi a ti on , resting on the disposition of Spain to change her Govern ment according to the views of our Government; hut this he believed was not the case. if he was COIT , Ctiy in. formed, and he believed he was, the offer was areefold. The first she was partly ready to consent to; the second, consistently with her honour, she could not agree to; and the third she could not accept, consistently with her Con stitution. The first was the recognition of the independ ence of the Spanish South American provinces. The se• cond was, that the Spanish Government should provide fo r the safety of the King and the Royal Family. Now, as no violence or menace had been offered to either, bow could Spain consistently with her honour assent to a pro position which would imply an undeserved imputation.— file third was one which a British House of Com mons must acknowledge to be impossible, namely—that the Spanish Government should promise that the nest Cortes would undertake to modify the Constitution. H e would only put to the House, with their knowledge of what a free and deliberate assembly was, if such a pledge could be given. It was stated by the Right Honourable Secretary, that as soon as Sir William A'Court discovered the use the factions at Seville were making of his residence there, that he went to St. Loran and embarked for Gi braltar; but it was known that he remained there three weeks ar•er the Constitutional Government had left it; amongst the Army of the Faith and the French troops, till the blockade and investment of Cads was completed, and then only an offer of mediation was made; and when an ap. plication was made to him to him to go to Cadis for that purpose, be replied that it was now too late, Cadis being blockaded and closely invested. But, he would ask, what bad Sir William A'Court been doing for three weeks within the walls of Seville, and in the midst of a hostile army? Could not he have gone to Cadiz during that in terval? In the debate, nothing had fallen to convince him that be had not stated strong grounds for the production of the documents called for; but, in case his motion was rejected, which was but too probable, he should feel it his duty to move a Resolution, merely to record his opinion upon the Journals of the House. He would not trouble the House long with it, as he did not mean to accompany it with any observation. _ _ The gallery was then cleared for a division-4°r the original motion, 30—For the amendment, 171—Majority against the motion, 141. During our absence from the gallery, we understood Lord Nugent moved his Resolution, which was negatived without a division. On our return to the gallery we found the House in Com. mittee on the Irish Law Courts Bill. The resolutions were agreed to, and the report was ordered to be received to-morrow. The House resumed, and the Report of the Committee of Supply was brought up. PROMOTION IN TUB N•/l. Sir G. COCKBURN rose for the impose of observing that in consequence of what fell from the Honourable Member for Aberdeen last night, respecting the promo tion of Masters of the Navy, be wonld take the liberty of giving some explanation. The Hon. Gentleman then re quested him to prove his assertions as to the actual provi sion of the Order in Council. He had, in consequence of that wish, brought down the Order in Council, and with the permission of the House would take the liberty of reading an extract from it. He begged, however, in candour to the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, to state that he (Mr. Hume) was led into error by not having the proper papers, or complete information before him. The Order in Council was dated the 15th August, 1805, and amended ea order made on the 17th January, 1883. It was to the effect of correcting it, as far as regards the examination of persons to serve as Lieutenants. who have been employed us Masters, and served as Masters, and enacted that such persons should be eligible to promotion from meritorious conduct ; although the individual who bad so distinguishe d himself e not rated as Mate or Midshipman, provided he had performed a service at sea for six years. Such was the tenor of the Order in Council, which he bad referred to last night, and he trusted that the House would see that his assertions were borne out by the document itself. Mr. HUME said it was necessary for him to state what the facts of the case really were. In the last year, re presentations were made to him on the subject of promo tion in the navy, and a copy of an Order in Council wt) put icto his band. In the absence of all official intona tion on the subject, he thought the best way to remove all doubts, was to move for documents, which he then did. Agreeably to that motion, papers were laid on the table, and a copy of the order in Council among others, which be then held in his hand. and quoted from last night. He submitted therefore to the House, that a similar state ' went which be made last year, to that of last nigh t, hav ing passed unnoticed, whether any neglect was attribut able to him ? He did not not mean to say that the docu ment now produced by the gallant Admiral was witbilld intentionally. The Honourable Baronet said last night that if be (Mr. H.) read further of the Order, be would hive found the proviso in that document, but it appeared not to have existence There, but in another order. ile hoped, however, the return he had moved for, would shew that the exception had been acted on, and that more that) one or two individuals had received the benefit of the proviso in the Order. WANKAUPT LAWS. Mr. COURTENAY gave notice that he would move for leave, to-morrow, to bring in a Bill to consolidate the laws respecting bankruptcy. In answer to &question put by Mr. HUME, Lord PALMERSTON said that the Army Estimates would probably be brought on, on Friday. Sir tiEORGE COCKBURN said he also expected to bring forward the Ordinary Navy Estimates on the same day. The Reciprocity Duties Indemnity Bill was read a first and second time, and ordered to be printed. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at half-past• seven. I 1 I I 4