The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-05-12 00:00:00

•
•

THE BRITISH PRESS.

around, he should certainly doubt his own judgment. Ile thmight
that if Minis era had acted wisely, they would not have waited for
a season of distress to propose this measure. On a former occasion
they ecfriaed to allow corn out of bond on any condition. 'rethought
their Ludships should recollect the manner in v. Itieh the measure
hail been brought forward. One Noble laird had advised an
address to the Crown; another Noble Earl said :be Corn Laws
had nothing to do with the dimness ; and the Ntilde Earl opposite,
on the contrary, had favoured the delusion, that the distress had
apoing ant of the Coen Laws. That delusion which was sanctioned
by the Noble Earl was much more mischievous than any thing ad-
vances' by his Noble Friend (Lord King.) He had no confidence
in Ministers. The question of a rewire price was first started by
the Noble Secretary foe the CoTortial Department, and it was con-
tended that in such a contingency Ministers should be vested widt
• discretionary power to import corn. If Parliament granted them
that power, they would take a great responsibility upon them,
which (he did not use the esprersion disrespectfully) he dared
them to rands*. He should, from every view he had taken of the
subject, rather carom the previous question. The Corn Laws
had been complained oft they were said to be the cause of the
distress; but he thought without the Corn Laws the country
would hare been in a much worse condition than it was at present.
He thought they could not long continue the Corn Laws. No,-
withstanding he would agree to the measure now proposed, he
thought the present a most disadvantageous and inopportune time
fur its agitation ; the present measure could rot be discussed with-
out going into the entire question. Ile would not pledge himself,
by the yore he would give in the present instance to the measure
proposed. He would not vote for it from any confidence he had in
Ministers, but on account of the useful tendency it might produce.
Ile voted for it from the nature of the question itself.
Lord KIND said, that when he was charged with having ad-
vanced what was mischievous, be hail et least the consolation to
reflect that in that charge be had been associated with good
; company ; lie had been classed with the Noble Lord opposite and
his colleagues, the Bench of Bishops. But it was not himself nor
the Noble Earl opposite who were in fault ; it was the law which
. was minchicyntra, and not them. Their Lordahipa should look to
thee manner in which the niessore had been brought forward. The
Noble Earl did not tome tic: real reason fur bringing It forward in
its present shape. He would, however, inform their Lordships of
the motives of the Noble Earl ; it was to web votes ; yea, to catch
the votes of the innocent politicians who were on his side of the
House. The Noble Eerl opposite did not wish for any alteration,
but there was some undue inflaence which deatrayed the equili-
brium of the Houle. There were very hard things said of Governs
went (a laugh) . • sonic said it was a surreptitious mode of carrying
the question; othersher, said that public opinion was against them.
The public knew the feel s.;• of that House; they kn !Yr, in a ques-
tion in which the interests of their Lordships were concerned, to
what side the House would incline. An apothecary who was a
good practiiioner would scarcely recommend his patient a change of
diet ; but that which was prescribed to the House was a change of
diet. Those who advocated the measure were aecuted °readiness, but
the charge was pointless : it did not apply. The rashness was marl-
hutable to those who were willing to run the rink of famine prices,
without devising any remedy for that calamity. The Noble Earl
was ainxiou. for Inquiry, which meant nothing else than to stifle the
question altogether. Front what he had seen of inquiries lately, he
was not at all anxious to apply them to the Corn Laws.
Then they were accused of precipitation. Could they he ac-
cused of precipitation with any fairness, he would ask, after the
experience of eleven years? it would be mere drivelling, after
such experience, to think they could not decide on the question.
Suppose it was proposed to decide the question by a Chancery suit,
that would last only 11 years ; but the'questioti was a Chancery and
Treasury suit conjoined. Now, he could not think the measure
; every quarter of corn witich'wan taken out of bond fur-
nished means to purchase goods for exportation, which was in fact
the only means of relieving the glut, or want of demand. The real
question for their Lordships to consider was, whether they were
prepared to check the raw produce of' the country, of which
corn constituted a large aortion / Corn in England was one-
third dearer titan on the Continent. If it came to be three
times as dear, the Corn Laws would be intolerable. In any view
they are prejudicial, and their injury was only a question of degree.
From the year 17112 to the year 171r2, the importation of corn was
unrestrained ; anti he would venture to say there had been in the
history of England no period of greater prosperity. All writers
agreed that alien corn was dear, wages were high, and the
interest of money low. If that view was correct, he was jus-
tified in tracing the distress to the Corn Laws. As a friend to an
alteration in the Corn Laws he Would oppose the preaent measure,
because in doing so he would arrive at the measure one year sooner.
It was folly to tear a famine price of corn when that article was
cheaper this year than it had been last. lie however thought that
they could not have any steady system without an alteration in the
Corn Laws. _

The Earl of CARNARYON said it was strange the Noble
Earl who brought forward the resolutions should have deprecated
discussion, and yet press those resolutions on the House. The
distress did not originate in the Corn Laws; but the manufac-
tirers, in their riots, declared war against power-looms and the
Corn Laws. The real objeds was to suspend the Corn Laws
altogether. It had b.en called a popular humbug—he thought,
justly. The effect of the measure would be to dissolve con-
fidence, and deteriorate the value of property : it was calcu.
lated also to make the people think they had paid an additional
salary to a Right Honourable Gentleman to govern the Ministry.
He should abstain from giving any opinion on the corn laws ge-
neralty, further than that he was unfriendly to the change. He
could not sit down without saying that he thought it their duty,
before imposing a protective duty, to give the question a serious
and dispassiorate consideration. (Hear.)
Lord DUDLEY aid WARD said he was not sure he should
not auppart the motion of the Noble Lord. lle wan an enemy to
the Corn Laws, and he thought the Noble Earl's proposition cal-
culated to save the public front their full operation. The object of
the motion was to mitigate the evil at present felt, and to prevent
its occurrence to a greater extent before the next Session. (Hear.)
If they waited rill the next Session, Government would not be in
the same situation as at present. If the motion were now not car.
tied, Ministers must, if applied to, either say we must do that
which, when asked for, was refused by Parliament positively, or
they must say, true, there is great distress, and many of his Ma.
jesty's subjects have been trampled under foot by his Majesty's
dragoons ; but we must not be wiser than the wisdom of Parlia-
ment--we must not do that forbidden by those who exercise
' a legitimate sway over the lard. The King has the power
of ordering out the military, but at the same time corn must
not be withheld from the starving people. Ministers may say
" Salus popnli suprema lex." They may have courage enough to
take all the responsibility of spurning the resent laws, under the
plea of great necessity ; but they should not be driven to hesi-
tate between the law on the one side, and the imperative
call of the people on the other. He would ask the most zealous
advocates of the Corn Lawn, whether, under such circumstances,
they could come to a dispassionate consideration of them?
Whether they would not, in fact, be the most likely to suffer? He
was an enemy to the Corn Laws, but he did nut wish to see them
PO swept away, as in such an event they probably would be, by the
feelings of the public, which would probably then run high. The
whole agricultural interest would thus lose that advantage which
they, as a must important body, ought to receive ; he meant sonic
compensation for having to bear greater burdens than other parts
of the S s'e.

Lord MANSFIELI) said he might agree to the first part of the
motion—the setting bonded corn tree; but lie objected to the
latter. He said it was an encroachment on the Corn Laws ; and he
thought they ought not to be altered without previous discussion.
lie could nct help thinking that die declaration of his Majesty's
51inisters rot to disturb the Corn Laws was very recent. Ile would
ask had anything occurred to warrant this change ? It was said
there was great distress ; but had the price of corn anything to do
with this. (Hear, hear.) He thouj.ht not; and he believed this
was the genetul opinion. 11. hat then were the causes ? Ile would
not enter into adetail of them now, because he would noticed to any
general discussion; but he believed one great cause was over. trading.
If he thought setting the bonded corn free would produce relief,
he should feel every disposition to entertain it : but this measure,
it was admitted, would have very little effect; and, if it would, ft
became a question whethef the effect produced would operate no
extensively as materially to benefit the distressed districts. The
distress known to exist would prevent France sending corn over;
and this opinion was supported by a paragraph he observed in the
newspapers, which stated that in Stockport potatoes had increased
greatly in price. Where was the necessity, be would ask, for Mi-
nisters having a discretionary power ? Could they not adopt the
same expedients in cases of necessity that they had adopted under
similar circumstances before ? Some reference had been made
to the possibility of a late harvest ; but if the average of harvests
was taken, he thought there were no just grounds of apprehension.
He thought any system was better than a constant change.
The Errl of LIVERPOOL said he should not go much into de-
tail, for, independent of other considerations, his strength would not
allow hint ; but lie wished to say a few words on the subject; and
he wished this the more particularly after the speech of his Noble
Friend—if so he might be allowed to designate him—because that
speech displayed such good sense, and afforded such a candid and
temperate expression of opinion, as was calculated to secure the at.
tention of all. He felt, too, he was still more particularly called
upon, beeatiee his Noble Friend had alluded to some supposed
change of opinion in him (Lord Liverpool), but lie could as.
lune the Noble Lord no such change had taken place. If
the Noble Lord meant to say that the law of 11315 was not
fIOW applicable, and that the law of 1822 required some further
alteration, lie ( hind Liverpt)ol) would 'subscribe to ir. Ile could
not look at a question of this kind as at a great constitutional ques.
lion, the principles of which were fixed, and the operation of which
should be permanent. This, from its peculiar nature, must always
be variable ; and they must adopt at different times such policy as
might be Wanted to the diffbrent circumstances. if it were true
that you legishsted now as you did in 1815, on the assumption that
the price was then Ms., now that 27.000,0(8)1. of taxes were taken
off, and these tases bearing particularly on the agricultural interest,
such as the income tax, that on horses, salt, and half the assessed
taxes; if it wire true—but lie apprehended there was not a Gentle-
man in the House or in the country who would'ansent to it—that
Mb. or 655. was the same thing now as 800. in 11115, then there
might be some ground for saying that the law of 1815 was appli-
cable to the present period. He was induced to say this in answer
to some observations firms his Learned Friend, but he wished to
dismiss these dineuetions from the present subject. Ile again pro-
tested against its being 'apposed that the present measures con-
templated any innovation of the Corn Laws. The subject now
under consideration of the other House of Parliament had nothing
to do with them : lie retained his opinion, doubtless, as to the pro- I
priety of those laws undergoing some alteration ; bat whatever''
that opinion might be, it had nothing to do with the meseures now
before them. He would even go further ;if he were asked whether
be would now effect any alteration of the Corn Laws, he would say


No. The letting out of horded corn, in his opinion, so far from
being an intimation, ought rather ro be viewed by the egricul-
radials ass security against their suffering any further iejury. He
would now gn back to what had been referred to by several Noble
Lords. It was this—that at the commencement of the present
Session. and several time," during the progress of it, he did most
sincerely, honestly, and decidedly state, that this was not a fit
period in which to go into the consideration of the Corn Laws.
Now this opinion he still entertained as atrongly as lie did then ;
and lie objected to his Lordship's motion because he thought it
involved the very inquiry he would avoid. lie objected to the
proposition because he thtaught the measures to he sent up to this
House might to be allowed to stand on their own merits, on their
own grounds. The House ought to see how they were sent up to
them before they decided on them, and not prejudge them by the
proposition before them--nor say, we will not consider them. Let
them come before the House, and then they could be dealt with as
might he thought advisable. He should now refer to the ground,'
on which these specific measures were moved. Ile could net help
Raying that the manner in which one of these met-ores was viewe
by those who supported the Corn Laws, was a proof that even in
their minds there was something like a conviction of there being
a necessity for what was proposed ; because, why touch the
question at all, if it was so objectionable? But if it was admitted
that one is required pro Nolo, it hi admitted that some such mea-
sure is necessary. Whence this change of opinion ? said a Noble
Lord: one opining is given at one period, and a few days
after Ministers come down with a complete contradiction. He
(Lord Liverpool) contended there was no change of opinion. His
opinion on the Corn Lass generally was exactly what it was at,
the opening of the Session ; but he would freely admit that circum-
stances had occurred which did not exist when he made that state-
ment rendering special and temporary measures necessary. These
circumstances were the distresses—not the muml insurrections and
the burning of power-looms, which he was bound to say were as
foolish as unworrantahle—hut the sufferings experienced in Lan-
ealihire, Derbyshire, Warwickshire, and other places; and never
was there are instance of the large majority of manefacturers having
behaved during a perioi of cinemas with more submission to the law.
They had by their conduct secured the attachment of their masters.
He must say these distressesincreaved, even beyond the expectations
of the manufacturers themselves. By an issue of Exchequer bills,
or by such assistance as the Bank of England had most readily
affinded, it was the sentiment of all, that they would be able to get
over their difficulties in two or three months. They looked forward
to getting considerable orders, and being able to set their men to
work. lie never said the high price of corn was the cause of dis-
tress; he had denied the over and over again ; but it was absurd
to suppose that a low price of provisions would not relieve it.
(Hear, hear, hear.) The distreas he attributed to the abuse
of their inosperity—to their over-trading. 'faking an average
of years, this country certainly did not produce more corn than
was sufficient for its own consumption. When this was considered,
and the possibility of there being a bad harvest was also taken into
account,su rely there were powerful reasons for the measures proposed.
Taking a period of 32 years from 17911 to Itt33,there appeared 11 most
defective harvests, and on each of these occasions there was an
importetion of foreign corn. This necessity might occur. lie recol-
lected in the month ofJune, 1616, there was one of the brightest pros.
petite of a fine harvest that ever existed, soil in one day it was blight-
ed. Corn on that occasion rose from lie. to 1 Ills. per quarter. Suppose
such a calamity melds were to befal us at the end of June or the be-
ginning of .luly, as the law now stood the ports could not be opened
till the 14th of August ; but if they could not be opened
then, they could not be opened for three months longer—
till the 14th of November. If the price were to rise front 130 s.
or 601. to 110 s., there would thins be, at a period of distress.
a tax imposed on the lower orders to the amount of 30,000.000/.
Under these circumstances he would ask if it would be fitting to
leave the country, during the ensuing recess of Parliament, for a
period of perhaps three or four months, with corn at the enormous
price of perhaps not less than from liOs. to 150 e , and with the
additional circumstance, that while it was almost a famine price,
there should be a large quantity of corn in the warehouse of the
country ? It was essential, under such circumstances, that a power
should be conceded to Ministers, which, under less imperious ones,
might be refused. The argument that such a state of things was
equally likely to happen every year was no argument, for the pos.
sibility of such an event should not be suffered to exist at all. It
haul been said that the people wanted work and not bead, and that
therefore the measure was unnecessary. Ile was surprised that
any person could make use of such an argument, because, although
it might be true that many persons wanted work, still was it equally
true that many of those who had work found their wages reduced
front 90 shillings to seven, to six, and even to tiveshillings per week.
Would any person of common sense say that to such persons the
price of the quartern loaf was a matter of indifference ? The fact
was, that, in the present state of the manufacturing districts, Minis-
ters felt it necessary to ask for a power as unsatisfactory for them
to receive as it was for that House to confer. He entreated that
the House would not try hie Majesty's 'Ministers by Its opinion of
them, or by its confidence in them, but rather judge of them by
their own interest ; and then ask themselves if it was probable that
they would be likely to abuse the power which was confided to
them ? A Noble Lord (Ellenborough) had been pleased to allude
to him in the most flattering terms, and had intimated his disbelief
that the measure originated with him (Lord Liverpool); but he
could 'mine the Noble Lord that he felt nn difficulty in stating,
that if any one person was more culpable than another in bring-
ing forward that measure, it was himself. (Hear, hear, hear.)
Ministers were placed in the predicament of choosing between two
courses, the one to make an alteration of the abating law—the
other to adjourn the general question, by providing for the existing
emergency, so that they might conic unshackled to the consideration
of its merits upon a (mitre occasion. He felt it necessary to say
a few words in reply to the Noble Lord who spoke last. He would
not deny that he was of opinion that it was requisite to effect an
alteration in the Corn Laws. In fact it would be the greatest pos-
sible mistake for any person to imagine that those laws could re-
main in their present state unaltered. By all that had passed in
1032, when those laws were under consideration, it was evident that
at that tient there was no intention to regard the then existing regu-
lations as permaent. On the contrary, the measure then pro-
posed was opposed on the very ground that the law of 1614 should
not be altered until the House was prepared for the final settlement
'of the question. That his Majesty's Ministers never entertained
the idea of making any alterations in the Cern Laws, which could
be unfairly prejudicial to the agricultural interests, be could prove
by an extract from a correspondence with the Government of Prus-
sia, which country offered the most favourable commercial condi-
tions if the English Government would agree to conditions equ:artianteghtlfhli.etelyoerri
favourable in the trade of corn. The reply was that his Majesty's
Government could hot enter into the question of the Corn Laws at
all in reference to our intcrcouse with loreignnations ; that t was a
subject which could only be discussed as it related to the domeetic
interests of the country. This ct rrespondence took place in Febru-
ary last, but so anxious were the Government to leave the matter
wholly at the discretion of Parliament, that they refused to make
it a matter of negotiation. What Government now asked for was,
a power onerous to themselves : they t sked fora special provision,
which had nothing at all to do with the Corn Laws--they called for
a power which they would not use unless it were imperiously re-
quired, and therefore he hoped there would be no difficulty in con.
ceding it. (Hear, hear. hear.)
The Marquis. of LANSDOWN said, that in rising to give his
vote in favour of the motion of the Noble Lord (Malmsbury), he
had no hesitation in stating his opinion, that at no distant period en
alteration must be effected in those laws. Ile was persuaded that
inquiry was necessary, in order to effect a permanent alteration of
the Corn Laws • and a temporary alteration ought not to be adopt-
ed. It appeared to be the intention of his Majesty's Government
to effect an alteration in the Corn Laws, in order to prevent a pre-
sumptive scarcity, which, even if it occurred, might be better re.
'milted by the exercise of their own discretionary power, tinder
their own responsibility. This would be better than attempting to
legislate in the dark. Every argument which haul been used would
apply with equal force to any season as well as to the present, and
all of them tended to elucidate the necessity of making a perms-
temper?t o all the chargesn
e,so,einaAiicinhwnibddtilieclhideiteinwibedwifsittrnieosttioile
dlootnuiuoetntlyuir
sad,,d,gituhtmrhitipoor thetuhseet
nent alteration in the law upon the subject. If the law were per-
manently settled, every farmer might take his lease accordingly ;
but at present all his calculations might be overthrown by circum-
stances which he could not possibly foresee. In the present bur-
thened state ache country jt was inipossible that the agricultural
interest could exist at all without some protection, in some shape or
utabrljyleeowt could a man lay out his capital to
other; but there might be a system even worse than bad—an un.
ad settle,alterationstmi,agyes.tetmor
wf
i:eaCsthitieeznitbi eens)
winds of heaven, tiler property was to be valuable, or
otherwise, according to the dictum of that Ilouse ? Surely it was
ld
eatmtilrt
interests
oaaetaeteemv
iinnrtorree
spnnacnkso
emntteet
shetapi
ftlietr ae
Tit,oni
trinnso.touggnte
oahswgp
0.
instance
responsibilityioi
If
st.siulenlbntee
theta
eltr:nareow yf,bdit
islh:ctiioceenhofhaao sudopd
necessary that some step should be taken towards effecting a per-
t
n
manent
oie
acettlnweouvdn..;efaeolr°t
and
tnin?ettsbnd: eteei 1:18:ilyll advantage
e wa;aaadoneolgs%ltuwshaingitwedeft veeferi
aopuetle swytornoe:ishith
omwasthlehmere?
(Cheers ) Nothing could be more mischievous than to reason
beforehand upon the mere probability of the markets being affected.
11 It engendered ideas amongst the country people that Ministers haul
private information ' • and the result must inevitably be, that en ar-
tificial rise would be created, without any reference to supply and
demand. lie felt convinced that it would be better for Al iniaters
to proceed under the responsibility he lied stated, until the next
Session of Parliament, and to avoid entering upon the question of
the Corn Laws until then. When the time for considering the
question arrived, however, he believed it would be Brun! impos-
sible to disconnect the landed and the manufacturing intetens,
which were intimately interwoven ; and when Parliament was
again called upon to legislate upon the Corn Laws, he
they would settle them once and for ever. (Hear. hear.)
Lord MALMSBURY and the Earl of LIVERPOOL mu-
tually explained.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and their Lordships
divided.

Contents (proxies 70) IC6—Not-contents (proxies 18) 67
Majority - 98
Their Lordships then adjourned at HALF-PAST TivEtv
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, TIMI3DAT, MAT 11.
THE JOHNSTON DIVORCE BILL.
The Johnston Divorce Bill went through a Committee, Counsel
was heard, and witnesses examined at the bar of the throat.
THAMES WATERMEN REGULATION BILL.
Mr. Alderman WOOD said, that as he had no expectation of
being able to carry the Thames Waterman Regulation Bill through

the House this Session of Parliament, he would beg leave to with-
draw the Bill until next See,ion.—Leave given.
LISMORE DIVORCE BILL.
On the motion or Mr. A BERCRO3IBY, the !Amore Divorce
Bill went through a Committee, Counsel being heard avid pit
nessea examined at the har of the House.
A BOIATION OF SLAVERY.
Colonel STItCI7 presented a petition from the borough of
Alahlom praying far the abolition of negro slavery in the West
India Gnlonion, -
K. DOUGLAS presented a petition from Cupar, praying
that no measures might take piece for the aborilon of slavery in,
*ions to the interests of the West India planters.
Colonel DRAKE: presented a petition from Ametsham, praying.
for the abolition of negro slavery.
SLAVERY COMMITTEE.
Mr. HUME moved that the Slavery Committee might have
leave to sit after the adjournment of the House.—Leave granted.

ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.
Mr. HOSKISSON presented a petition from the Roman Cs.
thnlics of Liverpool, signed by 3,700 persons of that religion, mai_
ing for the repeal of the disabilities under which they labour. Ti,e
peitioners„ he said. though anxious fur the repeal of thaw laws
which continue the disabilities of their body, would not preys Mt
consideration of their claims on the noose this Session, but wrre
anxious not to have that considered a renunciation of their claims t
they trusted to the generosil and honour of the English people tin
a repeal of thane oppressive laws.
Lord NU6ENT supported the prayer of the petition
It was his intention to present to the [louse on Thursday next ik
petition from the Roman Catholics of liogtand, to the !AMC CfreLZ.
The petition was then ordered to be punted.
DUTY ON MALT.

Mr. DAWSON preTientetla petition from the maltaters of 01.
weetry, praying tOT the repeal of the duty on malt.
COUNTY COURTS.

.T. Shl ITH presenietfaipetitinnfrOn Brighton, complain.
ing of the practice of coolty coune.7—Ordered to be printed.

COLON'EL BRA6I,E.Y.

Mr. HUME said he had to present a petition from • gentleman
named Bradley, who had been 20 years in his Majesty's service, 18
out of which lac was exposed to the dangers of a tropical Citrate.
During this period his conduct had never received from any of ha
superior officers may other observation !ban that of approval. The
petitioner notwithstanding had to complo i t of having been removed
from the army by the Commander in Chief. He was Lieutenant..
Coicnel in the 2d West India regiment. In March 1818, he be.
came the commanding officer of the left wing of his regiment,
stationed at Honduras. In 1819 the regiment of the senior officer
in command, at Honduras, was put upon half-pay, and he was tilts
rendered incapable, in virtue of his mere rank on the half pay list,
of bedding a commend. Honduras is governed by a aupermtendant
appointed by the Governor of Jamaica. In July 1814, Blake
Arthur, of the 7th West India regiment, was appointed to the Civil
Office of Superintendent. The command of his Majesty's troops,
at Honduras, was at that time held by Brevet-Maier Massey, who
resigned in December 1814 ; and the command devolved on Major
Arthur, in his capacity of senior regimental commissioned officer
on the station. In 1818 Major Arthur was appointed to the York
Chasseurs. The petitioner arrived at Honduras in 1818; and In
1819 intelligence was received of the intended reduction of the
York Chasseurs. The petitioner felt that when the reduction
took place, he being second in command, the whole charge antis
hoary command must devolve on him ; and Lieut..('ol. Arthur
invariably stated that. should he be put on half-pay, his authority
would cease. In June 1819. the York Chasseurs embarked as
Jamaica ; and in August were disbanded at Quebec, in Canada. The
month of October passed without any communication being made by
Col. Arthur to the retitioner that the former was placed on half pay.
In 1820 the petitioner. finding from the Army Lists that the York
Chasseurs bad been disbanded in Canada in the August preceding,
sought an explanation of Colonel Arthur why he continued in NM.
mend. Obtaining no satisfactory answer to his repeated applied-
tions, he addressed a letter to Colonel Arthur in 1821), calling on
him to state his authority for continuing to hold the command of
his Majesty's troops. Colonel Arthur on this convened a meet.
ing, which the petitioner refused to attend, consideting it irregular;
and in consequence of this refusal he was placed under close arrest
for ten months by Colonel Arthur, and stigmatized as a pers,a
guilty of unmilitary, insubordinate, and mutinous conduct. The
petitioner frequently called for a copy of the charges, but none was
furoished. The petitioner went on to state that Colonel Arthur,
to justify hie continuing in command, and his subsequent conduct,
asserted that he held a commission, dated so far back aslBl4 but this
commission did not exist till 1820, and was manufactured for the
occasion. He was ready to prove that this was an ex post farlo
commission. After suffering all this injusticr, the petiofoner eta ed
that he was removed from the army by the Commander-in. Chief,
with leave to sell his majority only. The petitioner said. findirg all
redress denied, he brought an action against Colonel Arthur for
false imprisonment, which having come to trial. Sir H. Turrets
and Sir Herbert Taylor were examined as witnesses. Sir H. Tor-
rens then swore that four general orders had been issued, which
conferred the power on Colonel Arthur; and yet, after the case for
the plaintiflLad been closed, the opposite par produced a com-
mission said to have been given by General Fuller in 1814. By
these means the petitioner was defeated, and only obtained a verdict
11001.) for the period durirg which he had been detained in con.
finetnent.after his dismissal from the army. Since then the peq.
tioner had discovered that no such general orders as Sir H. Woe s
swore to ever existed, and that the very commission itself was un.
known and unheard of by Colonel Arthur himself at a period later
than when the petitioner claimed the right of con m nd. The pe.
titioner complained also that the Treasury undertook to pay Colorel
Arthur's coats of the ecrion ; and theta Interfered under au. h peru.
liar circumstance's between two indiv duals. The petitioner prayed
that he might be examined at the bar of the House, when he un-
dertook to prove all the matters aleged in his petition. The Hoo.
Gentleman ('s!r. Hume) said he believed, though he bad not stated
all, that he had stated the rrircipal facts in td e t stition. The
petitioner had been dismissed by the Commander-m-Chief without
being tried by a Court-martial; and he (Mr. Huff e) thought if an
individual possessed the authority of thus remov.og another, and
stigmatizing his character, the power ought to be used molt
ap tringly.
Mr. BUTTERWORTH said the pe itioner wat obliged to N
put under arrest, to prevent insur e tion in the colony.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he had real the return,
and the charges contained in it were insupsoot table The pt tit orer
made distinct charges of l erjury end forgery against two indirl•
duals, whose characters stood tot high to b itni eached. and he put
it to the House whether such ate it cn °tog et to 1 e Ink! on tl e tab e.
(Hear.) When the retitle)! e- m. de these collo nt sp., ilt ions to
Colonel Arthur, the latter Er pea d that t' e r eilfferenct • shculd be
referred to the proper authoti ice, and it was in consequence of h s
refusing to wait this dec,Con that he pe Water was placed under
arrest. The petitioner eta eel that he was under close arrest to r ten
month,. Now, as a proof of the accuracy of h 'oaten ems, he (the
Attorney-General) would state *hat wa• ti e f sct. He was ender
close arrest for two months only, for at the expirition this i eriod
he was allowed to be at loge, with an understanding o ly oat he
was to consider himself order arrest till further orders. As regarded
his dismissal by the Commarder-M-Chief, he (the Attorney Gems.
rai) would read the orde- of dismissal from his Royal Iligline s the
Commander-in-Qhier, which would show that it was not the moth
of any interested representations. (The A ttorney•General then read
the order, which stated that the petitioner was dismissed on !Nutt
representations, by which it appeared he had been guilty of great
insubordination.] If the House referred to what took piece at the
trial, when the matter was fully investigated, they would reject
the statement of the petitioner. He was not content with the de-
cision at Nisi Prius, but moved the Court for a pew trial, when the
subject underwent another full investigation. The Judges. how-
ever, decided against him. He (the Attothey-Genetal ) should rot
object to the petition being laid on the toble, hut he certainly
would oppose its further stage. lie would not o nest to i s be.
ing printed, and its libellous contents being thus circulated th ought
the House and the country.
Colonel DAVIES thought the petitioner had mixed op ma ter
with the statement of his own grievances, which it had be n I ettrr,
perhaps, to have left out. But this might nit to into r ere with
the real merits of his cars. Any one who had acquaitrancit
with the two individuals referred to, whether' that sequin, torte
were public, or private, must acquit them of having act d as im-
puted. Ile would ask if Colot el Arthur had the commoisi,
whigh it was said he had not, why, when there was so much oats.
sion for its being produced, was it kept back ? If he bad brought;
it forward when required, it wou d Lace put an end to all the m s•
understanding. '1 lie petitioner kt ew Colonel Arthur was disband d,
and acted under in impression that he had a right to take the com-
mand. He (Col. Lavaca) would not enter ipto an inquiry now as
to whether he wee justified in assuming the command undor sigh
circumstances, but whether or not the petitioner had great reason
to complain. He was dismissed without being tried by Co?tird
Maeda], and without even leatning what the charges were agsm'd
hint. This, by the rules of the service, he had a right to. Ile
thought it monstrous that Government should have even rewarded
Col. Arthur, by giving him subsequently to this bustncas anotl er
commission ; and it was equally to be objected to, that he ass sett
to Van Diemeri's Land, in t thus avoided paying the petitioner set
only the damages, but the costs of the suit also.
Lord PALM ERSTON said, having read the petiti n. he wat
surprised to find charges against two individuals as Its. oat able as
any in the country. These imputations lie knew to he s
therefore should oppose the printing of the petition. The
question
was one of simplicity. The petitioner WAS guilty of vat in-
subordination, and if Colonel Arthur had nqt put hint ur to.
arrest as he did, the latter would have been guilty of a 8'"1"
dereliction of duty, and have shown himself totally unfit fur
the charge with which, by virtue of his simatldn, he was eentrusted.lt appeared to him quite clear that Colonel Bradley had btu
guilty of insubordination, and that his dismissal front the service
was the jut consequence of his breach of military duty. But thoug%
dismissed horn the emirs Colonel Bradley had been treated mil
great lenity, and instead of the harsh proceedings which hood bees
sueposecl to attach to his case, he bad, in fact, experienced all the
indulgence which could have been ahewn to an in,!ividnol, oleo
the circumstances in which he was placed ; for he was allowed te
dispose of limo majority, though he had purchased only his capta
cy. When the necessity of his dismissal from the error, for It.
good of the service, was considered, he, (Lord .Palmerston) thought
it must be conceded that the grant of the power ofsaleevineed
a considerable degree of favour. He conceived that it was very un-
grateful in the petitioner to have introduced the name of Sir henry
Torrent' in the ofiensive manner which had been adopted, as Slf
Henry had privately exerted himself, and made application of his
influence. in order that the petitioner should receive all the beiefit
which a person in his situation could expect, even to a degree of
partialit. As to the objections urged against the removal of Col.
front Arthur the legal consequences of pro( ecittogs institute against
him, there appeared to be no propriety in having that gemlemaa
dragged into a court of justice fur doing what his military duty re.
d