The National Register.
London, England, 1809-04-23 00:00:00

THE gATIONAL REGISTER.

4 1Z

coutd
che proved did not rest on sttelei,..nt ground t., lea'' I.) Ili •
punishment nfinir presto's who reany !rid the dispo-al of otra 0-.
The Right Hun. Cienticroatt said, Gentlemen might lati:,;it,
but he considered the subject in t- set ioi-s a point of
view to partake of their merriment. lie conceived it poi rly
inadvisable and inexpedient, at a moment like the rreent, to
set on foot no inquiry so indefinite in its object as that proposed
by the Noble Lord. The motion of the N Lord v.oulit
not lead to the conviction of any offender whom the Ifooie
would feel itsc' f caltt i upon to punish. It would be :i deviatitot
from the ordinary course of Parliamentary pr.r-eedings, be-
cause there n;.s nothing speci•c in its object ; ntld 1101)41)11e
advantage could be expectedliorn it, but touch public inconve-
nience would arise out of it.

Lord Anu ittuALu llAttlvros • supported the motion.
Lord FOLKCiTONE said, he could not permit the arguments
of the Chancellor of the' Excheqeuer to pass without oue or two
ob;ervations. If the Right lion. Gentinnan %I-a,: of opinioa
that abuses did not exist, he should support his motion for the
appointment of a Committee, bec;:use, if they Jo not, it wt old
relieve the public mind, who thick other.% ise, and prove 074
they do not ; and if it wt.:l.!! proved that they do exist. k would
relieve the public mio4 to se- that steps were taken Se punish
Or offenders. The Noble Lord coiwialed with observing, h:tt
if or thing could raise the mind to a dangerous ferment,
it woulA be tle opposition of the Chancelltr; of the Exchequer
to ids pr 'position, w ho was hiatself.the friend and associate of
the perst suspected, and, in his beli..f guilty of .gross maker-
ntions and corruptions in their public employments.
Lord irEN Ft Y PETTY differed front the Chancellor of the
Exchequer as to his view of the subject, hut could not support
the motion of the Noble Lord, unless there was some more
soeciti, Ernund wade nut than he hal allekr,eil. He con:[ lered
motion as 100 general, and that 03 COMM.!. tee shou'd be et:-•
trusted- with such large powers. He would ieel disposed to stip-
port the Noble Lord on any motion for an enquiry, which w;.s
rounded on any special allegation, and particularly so in the
present state of the public mind., when he thought something
ought to be done to satisfy the public. But he was an enemy to
,general inquiries, because he never knew an instance where they
produced any practical benefits.
Mr. WitiTnntan believed the general feeling out of doors
was, that if such a Committee were appointed. a vast va-
riety of corrupt practices would be brought to light. The
Bill introduced by the Right Honourable Gentleman he thought
not likely to meet all these abuses that were in existence. ant
therefore there was a necessity for further inquiry. If the'
delinquents could not be punished by-law, let them be punish-
ed as others had been, by the contempt and execration of their
country, (Hear, hear ! ) lie coneeiveti it peculiarly proper,
while fhe public mind was in such a stare of aOtation a- it was
in at present, to apprdnt a Committee of twent -one pet WM,
with such powers as the Noble Lord had proposed. Utley e ould
not be accusers, but would have to lay before the Hawse suet
material* as came before them, upon which the House woul I
afterwards have to form a ,indgineet. The Hoe. Me.i,!)er con-
cluded.w ith expreosing his hearty concurrence in the Motion of
the Noble Lord.

Mr. Secretary CANNING thought it impolitic in Any state
of. the public mind to excite in it expectations, let .the
consequence be what it may, where there was no prospect
of their being realized. Indeed, it would he impossible for him
consistently with what he felt to he his duty, and the duty of
every man who valued the form of the kovernment of this
country as it now stood. not to give this Motion his desidcd
negative. In opposing it, he felt it necessary, however, to
state, that he was not opposing specific i. quiry into spe-
cific abuse, but that it was the specific moti,,a before them
which he deprecated. Ills opposition to the one, did INA
imply objection to the other. Ili, Right llooourable Friend
was represented (hut he was sure it was unintentional) to have,
thrown something like a screen over particular abuses, by apply-
ing a remedy in a legislative form to certain illegal and corrupt
practices that had been proved to exit. There were remedies
able and sufficient to check the progress of abuses, when they
are under the consideration of Parliament consequently
he did not conceive it to be the duty of the House to apply
new remedies, if old ones were able to remove the evils of which
the Noble Lord complained. Was it to the discussion of the
whole syStem of the constitution—the conduct of the men w • •
bad filled the administration of Government for the last centui., ,
and the measures which characterised their career—that he
' v%ould direct the attention of this; Committee ? imputations