The Statesman. — London, England, 1810-05-11 00:00:00

!''~~""~ tip in the conduct of their Representatives or the house, for the sake of their own weight and con sequence in tbe State, ought to be exercised as purely and distinctly as their franchise was exer cised in giving their votes for electing a Member of Parliament, and that • those who fur private purposes called in persons who bad no vote to mix in the deliberations of those who had a vote, destroyerfor lessened the consequence of the real electots, and wished to govern by a mob. The separation did not deprive those who had no tote of the right to petition, or lessen it. With the greatest possible respect to the Petitioners; be was bound by his Constitutional duty as a Mem ber of this deliberative Assembly, to suspend any opinion upon the important subjects to which it alluded, until after he had heard them debated.— &Ting, therefore, to himself, such opinion as he Was bound to form and act upou, after hearing all the arguments that could be urged upon any pros position that might be offered for the public good, be was happy to second the motion fur receiving the petition offered by his Hon. Colleague. The Petition was accordingly brought up, and ordered to lie On the Table. The Order of the Day being read for the third *Airs g of the London Deck Bill, Mr. H. THORNTON rose, and said, that the former Bill passed under an express clause of ma. king reasonable compensation to all persons suse tainieg injury from the building of. those Ducks; knd he %sits himself one of the Committee appointed to investigate claims, and to settle compensations. - But he was sorry to observe that a great number of persons, who had suffered losses in their pro petty and interest by the formation of thosedocks, so tar from being compensated, were totally ruin. ed. lie thought there never was a case to which justice more strongly attached • the principle of compensation. He understood !barite application had been made upon the subject to his Majesty's Chancellor of the Exchequer, who, be under stood, had not yet had time to make up his mind on the subject. lie hoped that Right Hon. Gen tleman would now support him in a motion to de fer this Bill until Monday, in order to allow him time to form his opinion upon some plan of corn. pcnsation. 'rho 4iIANCELLOR of the EXCUEQUPt said, he should have no objection to defer the ; hut the subject of compensation was one so complicated, that it would be quite impossible for bi'', consistently with the various avocations of his public duty, to form any opinion upon it in so short a lime. Sir T. TURNON said, there never was a greater mistake thaw that of the Chancellor of the Ea. chequer on this subject. It hail beets stated that 750,0001. had been applied for over and above the original grant ; but the fact was, it was 906,0001. and would be the total ruin of all the wharfingcrs and warehousemen on the river. The Right Hon. Gent!emit' was, from his situation, bound to pro tect the public from mischief arising from' honest and industrious indivi►laali being crushed by the power of great public bodies, who expended such large sums more than they first applied to Parlia. meat for to gratify that cruel propensity. life was, therefore, fur postponing the third reading to unday. Mr. M MIRY ATT thought the Bill ought to pass withimulelay. . Mr. ROSE spoke very shortly, but in so low a t.►nc•we could not tell whether it was in favour of the third reading or postponement. Mr. uITBREA D was decidedly in favour of delay. Ho said he held documents in his hand ss Web clearly showed the Duck Company had been guilty of the grossest partiality and tyranny, in somuch that several Merchants 114 brought ac tions against _them for having acted directly in breach of the Act of Parliament under which they existed. These actions they had defended to a certain stage, and then they had come into Court, and paid taxed costs to the amount of 7501. If these things were true, this Bill ought sot only to be dekyed, hut should not be suffered to pass at all. Another Bill ought to be brought in, that the London Dock Company might clear themselves from these charges. _ _ _ Mr. MANNING said, he hall taken great pains tl ascertain the truth of these charges, and the parties denied them. Mr. W. SMITH corroborated the statement made by Mr. Whitbread, as to the actions brought against the London D.,ck Company. In one of these actions it was agreed in Court that a small sum should be taken as damages, and that a taro' fitivilid be settled by three Barristers. AftCr the verdict was .given, and the tariff settled under the authority of. the Court, the Company refn:cil to abide by it ; and the trial was no sooner over than they not only resorted to their old mode of charges, but even increased, under pretence (hat it was root a praspoetive, -bus a retrospective regu lation. He was, therefore ) clearly of opinion that the third reading should Ire postponed. Sir C. ANATCHBULL said a few words on" the same side. Mr. I. H. BROWNE said, he taw no reason why the Bill should be delayed. Mr. WHITBREAD said, that when this.ques- tion was disposed of, he should move, that instead of Monday', the third reading should be post_ potted to Monday se'nnight. Mr. N. MOORE spoke on the samcsitle. After a few words from Mr. Whitbread and Mr Jacob, the (louse divided— for the Motion, Agaiust it, - Majority - • 8 • The Bill was then read a third time; and passed. 95. 27 .0. SIR 1•'. 110i1DV,TT. The SPEAKER, informed the House, that he hail been served with a proet;ss by Sir F. Burdett, which, if it was the pleasure of the House, the' Clerk should read. The Clerk then read the process of nolicC upon de speaker, laying the damages at 30,0001. On the, motion of the Chancellor of tile' Ezche• suer, the process was referred to the Committee for taking the proceedings rotative to Sir F. Bur. deft tato masideration. -- ; ~~ IHE STATESMAN The SPEAKER thin infisrmed the House that the Serjeant at MIN had also been served with a process. ' The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER as we understood, said, that the Setjeint had been before the Sitting Committee in the morning. Mr. WHITBREAD did not see why the House should so totally abandon itself to the Committee as not to have the Serjeant immediately before it. self in order to hear what steps were taken against him. He had heard, that the report of that Com mittee was to be presented to-morrow, and wished to know whether it was intended to discuss it on the day on which it was presented. The CHANCELLOR s of. the EXCHEQUER had no objection whatever to the Serjeant stating to the House itself the measures which had been taken against him. Ile thought it rather extra. ordinary, however, in those who blamed Minis. ters for not being able to give an immediate answer on this subject, now to object to the immediate consideration of the report. Mr. WHITBREAD said, the Right Hon. Gent. had totally mistaken him. He had given no opinion whatever as to the propriety of the imme.. diato discussion of the report, but only wished to • know whether it was intended. The Serjeant was then called in. Ile slated, `that he had been served with a process, which he ;handed to the Clerk. The process was then read by the Clerk, and was, like the Speaker'a, in the usual form, laying, however, the damages in this action at 20,0001. It was also ordered to be referred to the Corn. mittee. Mr. WHITBREAD gave notice, (bathe would on Monday next move fur certain correspoudeuce between the Stamp-udice and the Treasury. CAPTAIN FOSKETT. Mr. LYTIgi, : rON ruse tb bring forward his promised motion, feeling that the thinness of the House was no reason why he should postpone it. His purpose was to obtain certain paperh the pro duction of which he conceived to he necessary; hut he declared, that any anxiety he felt fur their pro. duction proceeded more from a consideration fur the Illustrious Personage to whom they referred, and from asulicitude for the fairness and character of that House, than from any effect or weight which they were likely to have upon the statement which he was ultimately to make upon this sub. ject. It was nut his wish to engage the House in any military discussion, nor to interfere with the proper authority of any military tribunal. With this view he had' on the outset narrowed the question to the -mere enforcement of military law. He begged, therefore, to remind the House, that his object was solely to enforce the execu tion of the regular established law of the army, and nut to legislate for the army. It was much to be regretted, that in the course of the discussion which had taken place upon the admission of Cap. tale Foskett's petition, an Honourable Officer of high rank (Colonel Craufurd) had thought pro '• per to throw out some reflections upon the con. elect and character of the Petitioner, which made it necessary to call for certain documents, in order Ito prove that those reflections were unfounded. iThose papers were the several memorials from Cap. twin F. to the Commander in Chief and to the Adjutant-Geueral, together with the replies from these Officers, and else from the Duke of Cum herbed. Copies of all these pipers were already in his hands; and upon the opinion of some most respectable Officers . w hum he had consulted, ists was authorised to state that they fully sustained the charge advanced by Capt. Foskett. But ho wished to have them officially laid before the House. If this proposition were objected to, what was the inference ? Can Gentlemen be unwilling to publish the statement of the Duke of Cumberland in his own defence against the charge of Captain Faskett ? Would these Gentlemen have it supposed that a Prince's defence of himself was good for nothing, Of unfit to meet the light ? If it were his object to criminate that Illustrious Personage, he could ea require a greater concession than the withholding of such papers would imply.' But he bad no such object. The only use he meant tO make of the papers he alluded to would he of a defensive 111. tare, for the vindication of Captain Foskett ; but they should not in •any •degree tend to induce him to vary the motion he had originally proposed to bring before the House. The Hon. Member con. eluded with moving for official copies of the docu ments he had mentioned, which hail passed from the 4th of February, 1806, to. the 15th of Febru ary, 1,810. Mr. M. SUTTON objected to the motion, be. cause he did not think that any fair ground fur the production of the document referred to had been stated. The main object of the 'Petitioner was to fix *upon the Commander in Chit f the direct breach of law. But if it were Ineaut to ground that charge upon the refusal of promotion s. and that the offitais . were to be ransacked roi• - the production" of papers to make out such a charge, he submitted to the serious consideration of the House, that th e admission of such a precedent must tend to inter fere with the whole systein,lry which tire Army has been so long and so adviodageously governed.— This maims confess ipy grilse out of the dental observation of an individual in the course . of a former debate, -and was that a ground for calling fur pllper.:, w hick, reeording to the confession of the Mover, were irrevelant to the ul timate object ? The complaint against the Com. mender in Cirief for the non.execution of an Ar ticle of .War, was the professed end of the Peti. don. But how did the ease stand ? The Petitioner made vatious complaints. He fret stated, that an attempt was made to pro Mote a junior officer, but that attempt was not carried - into effect in_eonse (pence of the interposition of the- Commander in Chief ;—next the Petitioner complain, that he was not allowed have of absence when he required. But was it not surprising, that an officer who had been fourteen years in the army, sho u ld make that a ground of complaint, or was the idea to he mile. dotted, that that which was merely matter of rour. tesy should be claimed as a matter of right? Was it posale that any Gentleman acquainted uith the conduct of the army, or carelseleut to judge of the principles upon which it ought to be guverned, would plead fur the propriety - of iuteifcring with '..--- the discretion discretioe of any Maur commander upon a question of this nature? The next ground of the'' Petitioner's complaint was, that he was left at home when his regiment was sent to Spain: But was it trot according to the established practice of the army upon such an occasion to commit the depot for recruits at home to the care of some old and ex lierienced officer, who was, of course, to be se. lected by the Colonel ? Of this appointment, h _ow. ever, Capt. F. com plained, and in consequence ano ther Officer was appointed in his place, and he was 'to have gone to Spain, if the regiment had nut been ordered home. Thus then it appeared, that every complaint put forth by the Petitioner had been redressed, save that only which related to the conduct of the Commander in Chief, eariittf• lardy in the promotion of another Officer, to which promotion the papers moved for could have no re. ference. With that promotion, however, he pre. sumed the House would ever be cautions of med. dling, fur it tested epon a principle essential to the encouragement of merit, namely, that of pro moting merit wherever it was to be found, even though it was nut recommended by seniority of standing is the army. He trusted indeed that the House would pause before it attempted to inter pose with • the exercise of the increase of the I Commander in Chief's discretion upon such a sub. ject. For it could never be deemed discreet, or at all admissible, that that House should be made' the tribunal of appeal for soy Officer who th eight himself entitled to promotion, or that complaints should be encouraged against that authority in which, according to the long-established practice of the army, the right of disposing of suck pro motion was vested. Mr. ABERCROMBIE, though he cotild not concur in the sophistical arguments resorted to by the Right Hole Gent. who spoke last, yet concur. red with him in the justness of one of the conclu sions drawn from them ; that the House ought not to consent to the prOduction of the papers moved for by his lion. Friend ; when the question for bringing up the Petition was debated alit had been, he left the House under a couviction that if the House would permit its being brought op 'hey would not agree to its lying upon the table ; in that expectation, however, he was disappointed, and ho must say, that the House in allowing a Pe tition of that nature to lie epee the table, had taken a step inerersistent with the strict line of their duty. Ile thought it altogether a new doe. trine that this House was bound to interfere in questions of nelitary government between the ar my and the exectitive: he warned the House to be. ware of any proceeding that could possibly admit the construction of any attempt on' their part to wrest from the executiv.i that power which constitu tionally and properly belongs to it ; nothing would tend more effectually to relax that discipline that -was so essential to the army, as the %resting from Commanders in Chief all discretion whatever ; however beautiful the' theory, that pro Motion should be regulated by seniority, nothing would be found more ill...judged in practice than a strict and unqualified adherence to such a rule in prac tice, even admitting the alleged breach of the ar. ticks of war; still, he contended, that . that was I mo ground for that House assuming to itself the right of judging and deterinieing upon such a charge; as the party aggrieved had (mother gear. ter to apply to fur remedy and redress. With respect to the Duke of Cumberland, he thought him placed in a situation unprecedentedly severe, in consequence of the House agreeing to receive the Petition in question, because there remained upon their Journals a record of grievances im puted to his Royal Highness which the House re. fusing to go further into, must leave unContra. dieted on their Journals. He should vote against the motion. Mr. HENRY MARTIN was of a different opinion from his Honourable Friend. He thought that now the House had received the petition, they were bound in common justice to the Petitioner to give him every •op portisoity to substantiate the allegations contained in his Petition. Grneral CRAUFURD contended at outside rabic length that dangerous effects were to he ap. prehended from the interposition-. of the House in a question of the nature of that before them. — With respect to the Papers moved for, they were acknowledged to be not necessary to make out the case of the Petitioner. Here then the chief, if not the only reason for their production, had been given up ; 'and it would be found, (hat the more the proceedings in this liusinets assented a detailed form, the more inconvenient and objec, tionable they would be found. +This, however, he would say, that the defence of the p,oke of Cumberland could be rested, *Mm( any appre hension of the result, upon an ample admission of the facts themselves. Here the -Gallant Officer went into e detail of the grievances alleged to have been suffered by Capt. Fobliett,,lniagitoreeded to argue, that upon the Petitioner's own skewing, they were nugatory and groundless. With ruts yet to the charge of obstructing the promotion of Capt. Fos. kett, he denied, in the first instance, that seniority of standing iuvariably gave right or promotion ; it gave a claim, the strength of which, however, might 4c cif her confirmed or destroyed by the merits of the individual ; of those merits the Commanding Offi cer of the regiment was to judge. This discretion could not be withheld without doing incalculable mischief to the army—this then brought the quell: (ion to the justice of Captain Foskett's military pretensione Colonel Seymour had given his Royal Highness the Mike of Cumberland his opinion of those pretensions, and this opinion was not a fa. vourable one ; Captain. Foskett 11211 not discover. ed smelt know ledge of his profession in the (Ibid. pline and conduct of his troops. He was not con. s.dered as a good cavalry oil er. Colonel.Grant4 titan whom no man was a better nr snore citified judge, haul declares! that Captain Foskett's troop a as its so bad a state of discipline that it would be. necessary to break it up ; this was the opinion of Colonel Grant, one of the best field tamers in England, or perhaps in Europe. There were 'spun the same viand, objections to the propriety of letting Capt. F. go out to Spain. Another seri. ous ground of complaint was, the duel ; the car cumstatsees of which Ise deemed atrocious. Tit eldest Captain in the regiment (Capt. F.) 'vent gm. ,~ ..... m i . itAilid t li 'it n ` r .. fit - as i • ,I r o eel', a boy dig inn of age, la a duel, befirdiiiiiia and another boy ah e m 17, .the Corinit • and Lieutenant ; they fire throe shots each, and' then,: after having done so *IC out effect, an agreintent is ends that they dwelt advance towards pub other a pace each shot ; W the neat . fire, Lieutenant Wallace (he believed) was in the act of setting a hair trigger, when his pistol went off, and this was insisted up on as e shot, and 'lie.. was obliged to stand as a log of weed to be fired akvith hair triggers in a duel I Now he (Gen. CranfuM) thought, that the second who perMitted the settidg of hair-triggers in a duel, de. served to be hanged upon the spot. [Hear, Itea r il • And yet the man who had seconded in that duel complained of being barred of promotion. Had suck a tiling happened in his regiment, he would have brought the Officer to a Court Martial, and have rejoiced at his being cashiered for the same of. fence. • . With respect to the charge of blasting ti.e future prospects of Captain Fuskett, he denied that that could have been the intention or the wish of either the Commander in Chief or the Duke of Cumberland, as Captain Fosisett had been offered a Majority in another regiment. As to the ex. change, where such a circumstance happened b e. tween two Officers of different regiments with the approbation of their Commandiag & Leen, the juniors in each had no ground for complaint, 'for they remained as they were. He justified the conduct of 'cite Commander in 'Chid in not laying the memorial before the King : first, be , cause he hail no grievances to state, and next that if he had, he had also a discretion to j ut ' s ; of the necessity of laying them before his M e . jcsty. Another fact he was anxious to sate na; this, that the Commander in Chief had offered Captain Foskett a Majority in a regiment they serving in Portugal; his answer was, that besou g ht rot. redress and not for promotion ; this was th e answer of a matt complaining of his having been debarred from the scrxice of his King and Country, and professing his earnest anxiety fur such service. tic did not believe that there was another ofiicur in the army who would have given such an answer i n suede an offer. He concluded with expressing his eativictian, that Captain Faskett had hest treatet I by the Mike and the Commander in Chief with un. I precedeittett lenity, forbearance, and inutleratioh. The Honourable Mr.. WARD thought the speech of the Gallant•Otliter, as far as it went, ra. Sher an argument for the production of the lapis than against it. He, however, agreed with his Honourable. Friend (Mr. **crumble) that the House could not be too - cantinas hi interfering it t I eases of that kind. He, at the sante thee, thought that the case of Captain Fuskett was one of buy considerable hardship, and one that reflected any thing but honour on the Illestritois Personage con. corned ; tier had that hardship been lessened by the sort of speech that had been delivered by the sort' of speech that had been delivered by the Gallant Officer pear 1] Individual grievances, however, must Sall before the paramount plea of the public interests. If they beard this co•nplaint they would have fifty similar enes preferred to them, and they should get another House el Cate. mons to do tire business of the country, whiled,/ would he engrosses!' in military inqnititions; be. `sides, he thought, the practice would have Owed. feet, by frequent interference, of considerably relaxing the discipline of this awes, by holdi out inducemeuts to discontent ; for these MN" lie must, with great reluctance, tote against thet . •• motion. Sir JAMES PULTnNEY said, that hail he I been in the House when the petition had been pros ' posed, ,he should have voted for baseeeption.— Ile took that occasion of adverting to ah Illertiolt antic in that House upon a former ottasinn'il an llantosrable Baronet (Sir F. Burdett), respecting the iticrense of punishments in the 15th Light Bra. atoms, since the Ciammand of it (levelled upon the Duke of Cumberland. lie (Sir James) was at that time unable 'to contradict that statement; hittaipon so leaaptetit inquiry, he ascertained that fewer punishments, and a less timber of Courts Martial, had taken place during the period 9f his Royal Highness having the command, than dnr. ing the same lengli of time under any former t. Commanding Officer. Mr. W{LLIA NI SMITH acknowletked the house to be in is l state-of Conaideruble embarrass. meet, and that it hail nothing before it but t choice of difficulties—;hey must believe either Party in prejudice to, the other, Without On( '' i into the merits of the question any further, lie, was aware of the delicacy that should govern that • House in any interreretwo with the Executive; • but the principle had been laid down in so Inver .. tilled a manner, that he would wish to know,' it was to be understood that there mild be ne case connected with the army into which the inves tigation of that flimsy would be justifiable? .• Mr. WILITBILEAD obsernes, an rel ay to the assertion, that since the Duke of Cumberland had the command of the 15th regiment, the infliction of punishment. had considerably diminished —that he had also matte his inquiry, and the result was, that there was no such diminution of punishments, h at, on the contrary, they had i nc r e ased, and, unti l very lately, the practice of pitapieting—a relies! nholly discontinued in the service—was carriedlls into effect in that regiment. 'e H ono urable Gt. i n i t: g rali te Cr c a o te i r . indulge in the strongest aspersions againd PP' tail; Fuskett. pie charge:l that Officer with cen t:tenet! o h' f id th i e ho D ug u h li t e p o r f o ri r oll i be fi r v ls itni t ittO duct, which not alone affected his character as an Officer, as a man of sense, hut as a gentle man. The Gallant„ General said, that Captain Foktltt bad no grievance to enniptain of—that his own actions. %verb the causes of the :linpodimentl to his prnmation ; and that both in respect to the pro Motion that was denied him, and his detenllo ll at home when his 'regiment was in Snail', al were both attriblituble—:the fi rst his being rep orts a bad officer, who had been guilty of atrocities conduct; and the last to the ineffective state tifl_tia troop. After pleb aspersions cast urn Art ffis cer, would it not be an act of crying injustice to refuse the Papers for whit+ the Honourable M oser . has called ? II it be in the power of the G allant General to prove his statements, watt. ishjectio", could he here to the ret h i ction of the whole 01 the coil fun') why, for 1 charac that h mutior tunity system the MI ral hat be, fa allied a cuticle( was im would to di which to it'd" chit the me CIIISCr ' { hear, G t• it er: lain F, rat Con to ke from a breath &let ui Cetter4 Foskel bu %ill to Co this al his re brougl Hausa try iu subscri their d been n tilted (Mr. ti crince4 deriug be ten ullicer ~~ IDegat 1111 Tb Wed' Th Embc Mr. 1 fepr ti *base ere. a Re MI Fraul of th oouti ti T n ~_