The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-21 00:00:00

FRENCH BLOCKADE OF ALGIERS.

Sir R. WILSON wished to put a question to the
Right Hon. Gent. respecting the French blockade
of Algiers. It had been stated that his Majesty's
Government had despatched a frigate to Algiers for
the purpose of removing the British residents there.
It was also stated that when that ship arrived off
Algiers she had been prevented by the French block-
ading squadron from entering the port, and had been
compelled to sail for Malta. He wished to know
whether the French Admiral, under these circum-
stances, had adopted any measures to ensure the
safety of the British residents.
Sir It. PEEL believed he could give the Hon.
Member a most satisfactory explanation on this sub-
ject. It was well known that a blockade had been
long considered to be established at Algiers, and
when, besides that circumstance, it became notorious
that a considerable expedition was about to sail from
France to Algiers, the British Government had
thought it right to despatch a frigate to remove the
wives and children of British residents there, in
order that they might not be present at the approach-
ing scene, in which they might probably be sufferers.
The frigate arrived, entered the port, and took on
board all those who wished to return, with the ex-
ception of the wife of the British Consul, who, in
consequence of illness, we's unable to leave the place
at tbat moment. A communication then took place
with respect to her, between the commander of the
British ship of war and the commander of the French
frigates, to which had been entrusted the active
care of maintaining the blockade. The French com-
mander had doubted whether his instructions would
permit him to allow the return of the frigate for the
purpose of taking away the wife of the British
' Consul, but would refer to his Admiral upon the
subject. The rules applicable in cases of this kind
were, that all ships were to be excluded; but
it was the usage that ships of war despatched for
such a special purpose, and especially by friendly Go-
vernments, should be admitted to pass. It was some
time before the answer of the Admiral could be
obtained, but in the mean time the French Go-
vernment became acquainted with the circumstances,
and in the most ready and obliging manner inter-
posed, and told the French Commander that he had
misconstrued his instructions, and that it, was not
the wish of the Government to prevent those usages
which in similar cases were generally permitted. It
was right for him to mention, also, that before the
British Government had sent out this ship for the
removal of the British residents, the French Govern-
ment had intimated that they would provide the
means of safety for all the European residents who
should wish to quit the place.
Sir R. WILSON was perfectly delighted with
the very satisfactory explanation of the affair.
Mr. SYKES presented a petition from a dissent-
ing congregation in Hull, in favour of the abolition
of Negro slavery.
Mr. RICE presented a petition from Limerick
and its vicinity, against the assimilation of English
and Irish duties on stamps and spirits. He then
postponed the Order of the Day for the further con-
sideration of the Usury Bill.
Mr. E. DAVENPORT presented a petition
from Shafte,,bury, against capital punishment for
forgery. The petitioners expressed their disap-
pointment at the Bill now in progress through the
House, which retained the punishment of death in
several cases.

Sir R. PEEL should, on Monday next, propose
a Bill on the subject of forgery, framed so as to
obviate many of the object►ons made to the Bill
now before the House.

Mr. E. DAVENPORT presented a petition
Iron, Mr. James qint, of Cloodesley-square,
131ingtoo, upon the steiject of rates and taxes, which

Sir R. HERON presented a petitiob on the sub-.
ject of the duties of High Sheriffs, an, was min:
stood to ask a question as to what the Committee
had done with respect to that subject.
Mr. F. PALMER said, that the Committeejikie
received much important information on tlit,Ab-
ject, and be truqed that the result would be, to
make the office of High Sheriff much less expensive
than it hitherto had been to country gentlemen.
Mr. J. WOOD presented two petitions from the
Unitarian Dissenters of Bolton-le-Moor, in favour
fg tle Jews. He moved that the petitions be
printed.
Sir R. PEEL objected to the motion.

Mr. AldermatOVAlTH MAN thought that every
Member ought to be responsible for the petitions
he caused to be printed.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY mentioned that this morn-
ing he had received a document, consisting of 270
folio pages, relating to the burning of Ilindoo
Widows. Of these 260 were filled with the names
of the persons burnt, but contained no other informa-
tion.

Mr. D. W. HARVEY said that some returns
were unnecessarily printed. Those relating to the
County Courts and the Insolvent Debtors' Courts
were among the number, for they spread over many
years, and contained returns previously printed,
whereas they ought only to have been continuations
of those returns.

Sir R. PEEL observed that such reprints of old
returns might be prevented, if gentlemen would
apply to that most excellent and public officer, the
Librarian of the House, Mr. Spiller, whose labours,
zeal, and retoliness every indiyidual in that House
had had so much reason to praise.—(Hear.)
Mr. P. THOMPSON said that another excel-
lent officer, Mr. Irving, would readily afford most
material information as to returns cinnected with
matters of trade.

Mr. lIUME insisted that in the petition referred
to by the Right Finn. Gentleman, much important
matter upon the Grand Jury System in Ireland was
disclOSed, and the petition %vas on that account
worth printing, although some of its illustrations
might not be very well chosen.

Mr. O'CONNELL confirmed this statement.
The petition was laid upon the table, after a few
words from Mr. J. `Noon.

Mr. BARING presented a petition from the Ma-
gistrates and inhabitants of Thetford, against the
Sale of Beer Bill.

TRADE WITH MEXICO.
Mr. HOSKISSON rose to present a petition, of
which he had given notice, from that portion of the
merchants of Liverpool engaged in the trade with
Mexico; the prayer of it was that the House would
adopt such measures us would protect the interests
of the petitioners, and Mace the Spanish Govern-
ment to desist from engaging its expeditions from
Cuba, which would only terminate in disgrace to
the arms of Spain, and in injury to all parties con-
neeted with the independent State of Mexico. The
Right Hon. Gentleman called the attention of the
House especially to this petition, because it em-
braced points of the highest importance, and espe-
cially two questions-1. Whether Great Britain,
under the circumstances, had a right to demand of
Spain that she should forego these destructive and
useless expeditions; or, 2. Whether on general
grounds of policy and expediency, Great Britain
ought not to take measures for the cessation of hos-
tilities. It was well known that Cuba, of late years,
had been made the rendezvous of the Spanish
power in that quarter of the world—the point from
which attacks were directed against the free States
of South America. In 1825 an expedition had
been prepared against it by the Republic of Colom-
bia, and it had been the publicly stated opinion of
Mr. Clay, the Foreign Secretary of the United
States, that it could not but be successful in the
then state of the force of the island, and of the
opinions of the inhabitants. It was decidedly and
obviously adverse to the interests both of Great
Britain and of the United States, but particularly
of the former, that the tranquillity of Cuba should
be disturbed; and although it was not upon record,
it was a fact that Mr. Canning had had an interview
with the Colombian and Mexican Ministers, in con-
sequence of which, and in reverential deference to
the wishes of this country, that expedition had been
abandoned, and Cuba retained to the mother
country. A report had gone forth that Great
Britain had seen reason to regret her good offices in
the recognition of the independence of the New
States of South America; but he begged here to
deny, as far as his knowledge went, the truth of
that report. After the abandonment of the expedi-
tion by Colombia against Cuba, Spain had collected
in that island all the military she could concentrate,
and had husbanded her resources with the express
view of making an attack either upon Colombia
or Mexico, in order, if possible, to recover some
portion of her revolted colonies. In August last,
therefore, an expedition, was fitted out from thence,
and sailed for Mexico, and he wished to know whe-
ther Ministers had received any previous information
of the fact—whether they had made any remonstrance
against it—and whether they had told Spain, in ef-
fect, that in consequence of having saved Cuba from
subjugation by Colombia, Great Britain was bound
to take care that that island was not made the point
from which at tacks were to proceed to any quarter to
which they might be directed ? If no such remon-
strance had been made, he should contend that this
Government had neglected to maintain that strict
impartiality to which it had been pledged. That
expedition had been completely defeated, but it
had not been undertaken and carried into effect
without serious injury to the maritime interests and
commerce of this country. As it was now impos-
sible to restore the parties to the situation they respec-
tively occupied in 1825, when the expedition from
Columbia was relinquished, it was our duty to take
care that nothing was done by Cuba to assail her
neighbours by military aggression. Hostilities be-
tween Spain and her colonies had now bee❑ carried
on for one and twenty years, and seven years since
the British Government had declared that the con-
test on the part of the Mother Country was hopeless,
and ought to be abandoned. When' such was the
case, by the Law of Nations, Foreign States had a
right to interpose to prevent farther bloodshed.
War was a great evil, and ought not to be allowed
for the purpose of gratifying personal spite and ani-
mosity. But independently of the call of humanity
in this respect, third parties sustained serious loses
by the continuance of the war. Piracies, carried on
in the most brutal spirit, had grown up during the
state of hostilities to which he had adverted, and in
1822, so much had this country suffered, that she
was on the point of issuing letters of reprisal, in
order to assert and maintain her rights and to pro-
tect her trade. A Treaty of Indemnity with Spain
had, however, rendered this hostile step needless,
and under that Treaty the merchants of this

country had received about 30 or 40 per cent.
!Ton the amount of their losses. This country had
low observed a strict neutrality during a period of
even years, but surely there was no Honourable
Gentleman in that House who would maintain that
that neutrality was to be eternal. Our commercial
character, and our relations with Mexico, demanded
that we should not hold ourselves bound by it for '
ever; we were interested in seeing, not only that '
Mexico was independent, but that slie possessed the '
'capability of making thet independence respected. !
if the United States of North America said that !
they could not allow Cuba to he in the hands of
any
.%ritime Power, was not this country entitled '
.411Murd too, that it would not be a party to the '
United States possessing any more coast alone. the
Gulph of Me_Ljaa than that Power at present held ?
Thatewe7tglltiore especially true, as there wa-
iiood4reAbirto believe that they cast their eyes upon
ports belonging to Mexico in the Pacific; and were '
they thus to get all of Mexico that they desired,
there would be nothing left of its independence su-
perior to the independence possessed by the Indian '
tribes in connexion with the United States ; an in-
dependence, which, he need not observe, was held
at the option of that Power. In making those ob-
servations he was the furthest in the world from
meaning to create any impression that he desired
;o sec the good tnrderstandiog and mutual confidence,
now happily subsisting between two such countries
is Great Britain and the United States, in any
way disturbed ; but when lie looked at the
permanent circumstances, which determined the
policy of nations, he could not help being per-
suaded that it was the duty of England, as it was
her interest, to take such measures as might secure
the permanent independence of Mexico. The steps
necessary for that would find abundance of precedents
in the hi tory of Europe, with reference to European
States, and there was certainly nothing in demo-
cratic Republics which ought to entitle them to any
exemption. It was perfectly true that Mr. Canning
had all along observed the neutrality, and had incul-
cated that policy, but it was not to be observed for
ever ; a teasonable time was the duration which
was to be expected for it, and most assuredly there
was nothing in Republics, any more than in the most
despotic military states, which entitled them to for-
bearance. He would now call the attention of the
House to a correspondence held by Mr. Jefferson,
so far back as the time when he was Secretary of
State, writing to one of the Ministers of the Re-
public, ut a foreign Court, and speaking of the na-
vigation of the Mississippi. " You know that na-
vigation (he says) cannot be of any service to us,
unless it be accompanied by the possession of a port
at which the sea and river vessels might meet and ex-
change cargoes." Then he proceeded to state a
general proposition, to the effect that the right to use
anything—as the stream, for example, of the Missis-
sippi—gave the right to all the means that could be re-
quired for the enjoyment and exercise of that right.
In a few days after that, the same functionary
wrote a letter---*Fnfidential letter—to the Ame-
rican Minister at aril, in which his ideas are more
definitely expressed. In his confidential communi-
cation, he distinctly pointed at the town of New
Orleans, saying, that though it might not be pru-
dent to hazard a proposition of that nature at first,
;hat the general principle might be stated and set-
tled, and that by little and little the contemplated
cession of it might be rendered familiar. The right
to it, he observed, should be claimed, and also the
possession of a circumjacent territory, extra-territo-
rial of Spain. That was the idea he confidentially I
communicated, and which he left for future growth.
The war ended, and the war of the Revolution fol-
lowed. In 1803 the United States bought the
whole of Louisiana from France, with hard money;
and in 1806, Mr. Jefferson—the same Mr. Jeffer-
son, no longer Secretary, but holding the higher si-
tuation of President—began to broach the idea that
the whole Gulph stream ought to belong to the
United States ; and held that, whether they could
obtain it by consent er force, the acquirement of it
ought to form the fixed desire of their policy. In
1819, the United States obtained a further increase
of power and territory, by the cession of the whole
of the Floridas; and in 1823, having all those, they
raised a question about Cuba, and manifested de-
sires at open variance with the independence of
Mexico. It was, perhaps, scarcely necessary to add,
that the whole language of Mr. Jefferson, and his
views in every respect, were the same which the
Government of the United States held up to the
present time. There were also documents proceed-
ing from that Government in 1823, in which Cuba
was spoken of as calculated to' form a must in-
teresting accession to the territory of the United
States—" as affording a controul over the Gulp!)
of Mexico and the Isthmus, and so fill up the
measure of our (the U.S.) political well-being."
He thought that pretty well showed the po-
litical views of the United States. Now in such
a position of afEtirs he had no hesitation in as-
serting that this country was bound to maintain her
commercial rights in the Gulph, or be prepared to
give up her maritime and commercial ascendancy in
the New World : therefore, once and for all, he
would affirm that we ought to put Cuba out of dis-
pute. The Right Hon. Gentleman, after enlarging
upon the importance of the matter in question, and
the opinions entertained respecting it out of doors,
proceeded to observe, that if the sentiments of the
House proved to be in unison with those of the
country, those sentiments might go forth benefi-
cially, and might assist in putting an end to hos-
tilities between Spain and Mexico. This country
had high claims on Spain—not only for the inde-
pendence which she attained through our interfer-
ence,, but on other grounds; moreover, we were
entitled to call upon her for a cessation of hostilities
upon the very precedent which she herself esta•
blislied in 1609, by granting to the United Nether-
lands a truce of twelve years, which was not after-
wards disturbed for forty years. Now he thought
we had a right to ask of Spain that she should
grant a truce of twelve years. He begged of the
House to bear in mind that Mexico was the great
source of the precious metals—that the whole of
Europe was at present suffering under a scarcity of
the precious metals—and that much improvement
might be expected to arise from that increased sup-
ply of them which could alone be expected from a
termination of that disquiet in Mexico which alone
could be expected to lead to the working of her
mines. On those grounds—expressing only the
opinion of an individual Member of Parliament—he
must he allowed to say that he thought his Ma-
jesty's Ministers were called upon to exert their in-
fluence with the Allies of this country, for the pur-
pose of inducing the great Powers of Europe to
insist that a termination he put to those hostilities—
this country bad a right to say, so far as Cuba was
concerned, and, indeed, generally with respect to
the other points in dispute.
Sir ROBERT PEEL, said he trusted the House
would not only excuse him, but feel that he was
perfectly justified in abstaining from entering into
the discussion of many of the important points
which his Right Hon. Friend had brought before
them. He did not quarrel tvith the speech they
had just heard. His objections to discuss all its
topics were of a higher nature. His Right Hon.
Friend had addressed them as an individual member
while he (Sir Robert Peel) stood in a very different
situation. No one was responsible for anything
which his Right Hon. Friend might say excepting
leSs was the King's Government re-
sponsible for th language which had just been ad-

dressed to them. Accoidinely, his Right Hon.
Friend and he stood in very different situations ;
that was not the time or place in which he should
feel himself warranted in stating the policy-of the
Government, nor would it be proper that he should
give any opinions on the questions of natural right
which had been started; for, if he entered into the
discussion of those, he did not see how he could
avoid giving such opinions as might disclose the
general policy of this country ; he, therefore, felt
himself compelled by a sense of duty to maintain a
prudent and cautious reserve. The speech of his
Right Hon. Friend naturally divided itself into two
leading heads. As to one of those—the supposed
light of England to dictate to Spa'n, arid to prevent
her from continuing the contest—he should beg to
abstain from entering into any discussion ; but as to
the past policy of this country, he should beg to
inquire, whether there was any obligation upon us
to prevent Spain from directing an expedition against
Mexico from the island of Cuba ? In 1824, or
early in 1825, it was notified to the Representatives
of the Provinces of Mexico and Columbia that this
country could not interfere for the prevention of
hostilities against them; and, therefore, so far from
incurring any obligation such as had been hinted at,
this country avoided embarrassing itself with any
undertakings whatever, though she might by re-
monstrances oppose to it the strong moral power
which her remonstrances naturally carried; but it
had not done so. He must, however, say that therd
had been touch misunderstanding on this subject; but
he would put it to the House in this way--was there
such injury done to Mexico and Colombia as created
upon us a moral obligation to interpose our eutlio-
r:ty with Spain to force that country to forego its
expedition from Cuba ? This he thought was suffi-
ly shown by the past conduct of the British
Government. The language of Mr. Canning, both
in his despatches and in his place in Parliament,
was, that in the contest between Spain and her Co-
lonies England would maintain a strict eeutrality—
that was the language of Mr. Canning, both ix his
communications with the Freneh Government, and
his speeches in this House. He need not add, that
if the interdict spoken of had been issued, it would
have been a departure from that neutrality. As the
character of the country, and of the eminent and
distinguished mail whom he mentioned, was some-
what involved in the present discussion, he trusted
the House would allow him to enter a little more
into detail. First, with respect to the existence of
any such interdict or remonstrance—he was pre•
pared to deny it—there was not a trace of it in the
Foreign Office ; and if such a paper ever had exist-
ence, the usage of the office would have insured its
preservation, even if Mr. Canning's own habits of
regularity had not been such as would have rendered
its loss impossible, for he was not less distinguished
for industry than be was for those intellectual
powers supposed to be incompatible with that qua-
lity. First, then, there was no written record of
any such document ; and, secondly, if there had
been, he was prepared to maintain that it never. had
been issued at the instance of Spain. In the course
of the. latter part of the year 1825, the United
States did interfere to a certain degree. The do-
cuments on the subject had been laid before Con-
eress, and, therefore, there could be no doubt upon
the subject. The course that the United States
adopted was to appeal to Russia to mediate on the
occasion between the parties, on the supposition
that preparations were making in Mexico and Co-
lombia for the purpose of attacking Cuba. The
United Sates, therefore, had recourse to is
friendly interference till there should be time to ap-
peal to Russia; and accordingly on the seoth Dec.,
1825, Mr. Clay, the Secretary of State, addressed a
letter to the Colombian Minister, resident at Washing-
ton, to inform him of the circumstance. Mr. Clay there
stated that the President, suspecting that there was
an intention of sailing against Cuba or Porte Rico,
thought that it would have a salutary tendency to-
wards peace if Colombia would allow time to elapse
for the purpose of ascertaining the result of the
pacific efforts which the great Powers were making.
The reply of the Colombian Minister to this com-
munication was important. It was dated 30th Dec.
It stated that he would communicate the Presi-
dent's Message to the Colombian Government by
the first opportunity; but at the same time con-
tained the assurance, that neither by official com-
munication, nor by his private letters, had he any
knowledge relative to the expedition preparing at
Carthagena ; he was therefore inclined to believe,
that what was said had been formed on vague con-
jecture. He likewise assured the Secretary, that his
Government, knowing the consequence of an ill-
judged attempt against Cuba or Porto Rico, pre-
ferrred, though an opportunity might present itself,
waiting for a favourable moment of attack, so as to
be certain of success. From this despatch of the
Minister of Colombia, it did not appear that there
was any intimation of the interference of England,
or that it was expected that she would treat such
an attack with interference; and therefore there
certainly must have been some misapprehension on
this subject on the part of his Hon. Friend. But
with respect to any supposed interference on the
part of this country, he would venture to speak still
more openly. He knew that it was not a practice
in that House to quote official papers that had not
been laid before Parliament. But as this was a very
peculiar case, and as the character of the late Mr.
Canning appeared to be involved in it to some ex-
tent, he was sure that the House would excuse him,
. and permit hint to quote the authority of Mr. Can-
ning himself with respect to his construction of
what had taken place. He bad lying before him an
• extract of a despatch with which Mr Canning had
furnished Mr. Dawkins, in March, 1826. In that
despatch the Right Hou. Gentleman made use of the
words, " You will see how earnestly it is desired by
the United States, by France, and by this country,
that Cuba should remain a Colony of Spain. The
British Government, indeed, so far from denying the
right of the new States of America to make a hos-
tile attack upon Cuba, whether as the possession
of a power with which they were at war, or as an ar-
, serial from which expeditions may be fitted out, felt
. it so strongly, that we uniformly refused to join with
the United States in remonstrances with Mexico
and Colombia against their supposed intention, or in
, intimating that we should receive displeasure at its
execution." He really thought that this extract,
coupled with the absence of any evidence to the
contrary, was sufficient to lead to the conclusion
that Mr. Canning never intended to notify to Mexico
or Colombia that they were not at liberty to direct
any expedition against Cuba, or that, if they did,
they would be subject to the displeasure of Eng-
land. He believed that it was possible that Mr.
Canning might have verbally remonstrated against
E the excitement likely to ensue in the case of the
r slaves being stirred up to take a part in the war.—
He certainly did think that Mr. Canning might have
, intimated that any appeal to the slave population
against their masters would not be viewed without
. displeasure. It was on this very ground that the
United States claimed the right to remonstrate, be-
cause it was felt, that if at Cuba, which was to
Spain now the only point d'appui, such a step was
taken, a contagion might spread, which would prove
dangerous to the safety of the United States, by
which that Government would feel called on to in-
terfere its power. He therefore could not doubt,
that when Mr. Canning looked at our possessions in
the West Indies, and what interests we had at stake
there, he should have made some verbal communica-
tion to the Colombian Minister, although of a writ-
ten document there was no record. Again, he said,
it was possible, and from what he had heard lie be-
lieved that such a conversation had taken place, but
he appealed to Mr. Canning's despatch to Mr. Daw-
kins, to show that that Right lion. Gentleman
clever interposed the authority of ibis country
against any hostile aggressions, which were con-
sistent with the usages of war. 'He considered all
these facts of great importance, for they showed that
whatever the abstract right or policy of the question
might be, no moral Obligatib!Huo:-obligation of
honour was lying upon this` country to protect the
provinces of MeXico or ColoMbia now that they
were threatened; becitufr! tvs 4§4lcotti,tud, Cuba

Vrom their attack. He would admit, however,
that it was the general interest of this country
to seek the re-establishment of tranquillity in
all parts of the world. We had—Spain had—
Mexico had—the whole world had, the deepest in-
terest in maintaining the tranquillity of South
America ; and for himself, he should deeply regret
any event that tended to subvert the independence
of any of those provinces, or that threw obstacles
In the way of the assertion of their freedom. With-
out discussing any abstract question, the Govern-
ment of this country was disposed to speak in the
language of friendship to Spain; and certainly there
never was a period in the history of the relations
between England and Spain, when there was a
greater probability that the earnest advice of Eng-
land would be heard ; and this country would not
be acting the part of true friendship, if she did not
counsel Spain not to waste those great energies of
which she was possessed, in harassing, by fruitless
endeavours, the tranquillity of South America, but
to consent to some course by which the independence
of those provinces was not immediately established,
and an end might be put to the hostilities which now
existed. It was quite evident that we in common
with every maritime nation, and indeed with every
nation that felt interested in the prosperity of every
Country—could not help having a deep interest in
the settlement of this question. The state of things
which existed in those States, naturally tended to
encourage robbery of all sorts—and particularly
pirney on the high seas, v,hich was an obstacle to
the commerce and the well-doing of all nations.
Spain by a wise conduct would stilt be able to
secure her other magnificent possessions, while, if
she persisted in continuing hostilities, she might
bring Cuba to a state of disturbance and discontent
equal to what prevailed in the South American
provinces. Spain, by continuing the warfare, might
" be able to encourage faction, but even that would
not give her a chance of recovering her ascendancy—
for there was not in all those provinces one single party
on which Spain could rely. But even supposing that
she were able to re-assert her authority by means of
military force, what would be the nature of the
tenure on which she would be holding those revolted
provinces ?He believed that Spain could not inflict on
herself a greater curse than that which would arise from
a temporary success. What would it do for her ? She
would be enabled to hold three or four fortifications
and to establish about as many garrisons. But further
than that her struggles would be fruitless; for it was
Contrary to all experience to find the mother country
ever again establishing her power when it had once
been shaken off; besides which, the whole of her
strength in Europe must be paralysed by keeping up
so extensive an armed force in Sarah America. For
the interest of Spain herself, therefore, he depre-
cated the present attempt ; and he earnestly hoped
that Spain would listen to the most friendly advice
that she was daily receiving from this country to gire
up a state of things which was only tending to em-
barrass without adding one tittle to the prosperity of
that country. As his Right Hon. Friend had ob-
served, there were precedents in the history of
.Spain of the course which it was now hoped she
would adopt. In the case of Spain and the Nether-
lands, in the first instance there was'a suspension
of hostilities; and afterwards, so convinced was
Spain of the hopelessness of her attack on that latter
country, that its independence was recognised.—
Neither was this the only instance in which Spain
had seen the advantage of bringing hostilities of this
kind to a close; and it might have been well for us
if we had taken her advice on the occasion to which
he was alluding. She wisely perceived, when we
stood with respect to the United States in the con-
dition as she now stands with respect to South
America, that to carry on a war for their recovery
was fruitless. In the year 1779 Spain was so satis-
fied of the hopelessness of the contest—she felt so
deeply the injury which other nations were sustain-
ing, from the protractel struggle, that she offered
England her friendly mediation on the subject; and
she advised this country, that if we were not pre-
pared to recognise their independence, we should at
least consent to a cessation of hostilities, in which
it would not be necessary for either party to waive
the conflicting question for this' purpose, and shere-
commended a truce in the hope that it would end in
negociation and recognition. —We, however, rejected
the advice* of Spain. But did we gain our point ?
We did not : and Spain, if she rejected our advice
on the present occasion, would find the same cense-
yiences follow. So far trona proceeding in establish-
ing her authority, she would only proceed in weaken-
ing her energies, and in diminishing the good will of
those other nations whose object it was to effect an
accommodation. He trusted that he had now said
enough to rescue himself and the Ministers of this
country from any accusation of indifference as to
the prosperity of those colonies. On the other im-
portant, but very delicate point, to which his Right
Hon. Friend alluded, he would say a few words.
That point referred to what were the views of the
United States. On this subject he for one hoped
that that country, with the freedom of its Consti-
tution, and in the possession of some of the finest
institutions in the world, would have too much ge-
nerosity to profit by the weakness of Mexico. He
trusted that the people of the United States would
feel that the institutions of Mexico corresponded
with their own ; and that if they incapacitated
Mexico from defending herself against the aggres-
sions of Spain, they would be inflicting an injury
on that liberty and independence which were of a
part with the Constitution of their own free country.
He thought that they had every reason to place im-
plicit faith in the declarations of those by whom
that country was governed. The Minister who re-
presented the United States here, he believed to be
as honourable a man as ever breathed; and, cer-
tainly, from the declarations which had been received
on all hands, it would appear that his Right Hon.
Friend was wrong in assuming that there was any
intention on the part of the United States to avail
themselves of the situation of the south American
provinces. These were contingencies, however,
which deserved consideration, and it was impossible
to deny that England was deeply interested in the
disposal of them. He, however, trusted that there
was not only no intention on the part of the United
States to take advantage of the weakness of Mex-
ico, but that it would do all in its power to prevent
those indirect modes of obtaining possessions which
were too often resorted to in the new settlement of
a country. He now trusted that he had said enough
upon this subject to prove that Government was
not indifferent to the importance of it, and to meet
the objection that it could not be justly charged with
any dereliction of honour, if it did not feel itself
compelled to enter into a defensive alliance with
Mexico, or to prevent any attacks upon her. He
said nothing of the abstract right of the question;
all he meant was, to deny that there was any obli-
gation on this country to join Mexico. [lt is right
to state that the latter part of the Right lion. Baro-
net's speech is reported chiefly from memory; for,
owing to the want of lights in the house, it was
almost impossible to take a note of the speech.]
Sir R. WILSON—The latter part of the night
Honourable Gentleman's speech had afforded him
much satisfact'on ; but with respect to the course
pursued by England in 1825 he coull not entirely
concur. It was certainly very generally understood,
that the expedit on proposed by Mexico and Co-
lombia was abandoned in consequence of what Mr.
Canning had said. Indeed, he had the best au-
thority for knowing that Bolivar had determined on
an attack on Porto Rico, and that the British Mi-
nister in Colombia communicated to him the objec-
tions that' there were to the expedition, founded on
the former communication of Mr. Canning. He
was able to state this positively, because he had re-
ceived a communication from Bolivar himsAtlf to
that effect. And so strongly did this impression
prevail, that for the last two
.years the Minister
was required to do all in his power to remove the
interdict which it was presumed existed. At length
Mexico, however, determined to make the attempt,
but was prevented ; discussions ensued with thi:
country, followed by a declaration, which he had no
doubt was impartially given, as the discussions h.
behind were most impartially conducted. 'lliac

, deAration was not written, but it was a verbal ex-
pression, which stated in clear terms the opinion
which the Government of this country entertained
concerning that expedition. The consequence of
it was, to disperse one expedition, and prevent
another from sailing, and finally to make the Mex-
ican and Colombian Governments give up those en-
terprizcs they had for some time contemplated
against the Spanish colonies. The Right Hon.
Gentleman said that Spain was no party to any
engagements with us which gave us a right to call
on her to forbear—that we had nothing to do with
preventing the Mexican and Colombian Govern-
ment from making an attack on Cuba, when they
were resolved to attack it. He hoped it would not
he supposed that a nation, great and powerful like
this, had interfered to prevent these States, when
they were powerless, from sending their expedition
to Cuba. It appeared, in the first place, a doubtful
point whether it was intended to demand a cessation
of these expeditions on the part of Spain in the
interest of England ; but in the second place, it
was not at all doubtful that the British Govern-
ment was deeply impressed with the great import-
ance of the subject. What was the inference ?
Why, that it relied on the negociations it was car-
rying on to attain the object. When the House re-
collected, however, how slow, how ambiguous
were negociations, what a length of time it took be-
fore they could check any measure or agitation--
when the House recollected that these negociations,
if deferred, would produce agitation—he thought a
demand or a request on the part of his Majesty's
Government would better accomplish the object. If
that Government were resolved to put an end to a
war of destruction, if the interests of Great Britain
demanded it, the British Government ought now to
say, as Lord Bolingbroke said to the French Mi-
nister on a former occasion, respecting the Govern-
ment of Spain. The French Minister said, that it
was for the interest of France that Spain and France
should be under the government of one family; but
it is not, said Bolingbroke, the interest of Britain
to allow that to continue. In 1672. also, when the
treaty of Madrid took place—when Venice was car-
rying on war against the Netherlands, and objected
to making peace—the King of France declared that
the interest of Europe required that peace should be
procured for the Netherlands; and he said the States
must make peace, or that he would make war
against those who refused. This was the sort of
language and conduct that ought now to be held by
the Government of Great Britain towards Spain, if
it were disposed to act towards it in the most
friendly manner. It would not call on that Power
to make any sacrifice, but to do that which would
be very beneficial to herself, and of great utility to
the rest of mankind. It was said that Spain was
not at present engaged in any hostile expedition,
and that she entertained no view of undertaking a
new enterprise against the States of South America.
But he knew that a proposition had been sent from
Cuba to Spain, for the latter to raise twenty-five
thousand men; which being sent to Cuba, the Go-
vernment there undertook and pledged itself to re-
conquer the province of Mexico for Spain. If
the declaration of the Government of Cuba
was worth any thing, it deserved some at-
tention. Spain, however, had decided to carry the
proposition into effect, and the preliminary steps
for preparing an expedition had been taken. In every
regiment a register had been opened, to insert the
names of those soldiers who would volunteer their
services. The Chambers, also, of the different local
governments in Spain, were providing funds for the
purpose. Spain was negcciating; but in the mean
time she was taking measure if the negociationt
did not succeed, to act in herlign manner. Whether
she actually sent the expedition to Cuba or not, the
effect on Mexico and Colombia would be the same.
Those States would be kept in agitation—the tocsin
would be sounded, hostile parties would be called
into the field, preparations would he made, and new
burdens would be imposed on the people. These
would be the consequences of the demonstration—
they would be almost as bad as the consequences of
actual invasion, unless the demonstration could be
checked and put aside. Those States could not be
disposed to sacrifice their own frontiers, and in the
expectation of an attack, they must take measures
to defend themselves. Mexico and Colombia would
be exposed to the same circumstances as they were
exposed during the last year. At the time when
the expedition was formerly preparing by General
Valdez, he had, in conjunction with some merchants,
waited on the Secrt tary of State for Foreign Affairs.
What then passed was no secret, and he might
therefore state it. The Earl of Aberdeen then said
to the Deputation, that there was no intention what-
ever on the part of Spain to send any expedition,
and fifteen days afterwards General Barradas
He did not accuse the Earl of Aberdeen of wishing
to deceive the Deputation—far from it ; nor could
he accuse the Spanish Minister of deceit. He had
known Mr. Zee formerly, and knew him to be an
honest man, and he had no doubt that he had
made no declarations but what his duty required.
For several years America had been harassed by
these expeditions, and by these threats of expedi-
tions ; and it was time to put an end to that state of
things—England was much interested in doing so.
A newspaper from America, or the packet
brought over intelligence that an expedition was
forming by Spain, and immediately all the trading
community of England was alarmed—goods that
were ordered to be shipped are stopped—those that
were ordered to be made are countermanded—
enterprize rested—speculation stood still—doubts
came over every mercbant, and trade was suspended.
England suffered, therefore, from the continued
hostility as well as Mexico. The Mexican Govern-
ment was harassed by new difficulties. It had not
only to provide means to repel the attacks of Spain
—it was exposed to another danger which these
threatened attacks augmented. He was far from
saying that the Government of the United States
encouraged any seditious proceedings ; he believed
that it desired no change; it had no wish to throw
impediments in the way of the Mexican Govern-
ment, but it was not, perhaps, quite able to
controul its own subjects. It had not en-
couraged any attacks on the province of
Texas ; but there were 5,600 of the subjects
who had become squatters in that province, and
who resisted the Mexican Government. They had
taken possession without any right, and they held it
without any justice. The Government of Mexico
could not allow 250 leagues of sea coast to be taken
away, and one of the finest provinces of the whole
continent of America. These people resisted the
Government of Mexico, and resisted it in a point
which should recommend that Government to the
philanthropists of England. The Mexican Govern-
ment had issued a decree to abolish slavery throughout
its dominions, but the American squatters, who car-
ried slaves along with them, had declared that they
would not obey the Mexican law—they regarded
themselves as independent in fact, and declared that
if the Mexican Government sought to enforce it
[hey would call on the Government of the United
States to protect them. This added to the diffi-
culties of Mexico. She was obliged to keep a large
force, amounting to 4,000 men, in this province, to
protect it and protect its own subjects. Nor was it,
perhaps, possible to keep this province from becom-
ing part of North America, the squatters, whether
encouraged or not, were spreading themselves over
it, and would unite it to the United States. This
state of things could not be allowed to continue with
any advantage to this country. It gave encourage-
ment to the United States to interfere with these
new States of America. It encouraged disorder in
Texas, and destroyed that balance of power among
the American States, which was as necessary in
America as in Europe. It was of great consequence
to this country that the United States were slowly
acquiring the coasts on both sides of the Gulph of
Mexico, arid by and bye our ships would be unable
to enter that Gulph without passing under the guns
of the United States. The balance of power there
would be destroyed, and after extending themselves
on one side, the (Jolted States would extend them-
selves on the other, and go beyond the River Sair4
Lewrenee. All these things Were seen, and it was

time for this country to take steps to put an end to
a state of hostility leading to the subversion of our
best interests. We ought now to disperse that
cloud, which might ultimately burst in a storm to
our injury or ruin. When the House considered
with attention the state of this country, the ascen-
dancy it had once enjoyed, and still ought to main-
tain; when it considered the commercial interests we
had enjoyed, which the Government was bound to
defend ; when it considered the rights individuals ac-
quired in that country, and justly acquired, which
it was the duty of the Government not to suffer to
be impaired ; and when it considered the conse-
quences of the contest to ourselves, he thought the
House would call on his Majesty's Government to
take up the matter, so as to bring it to a speedy
conclusion.

Mr. A. BARING considered this subject one of
great magnitude and importance, and although it
might be deemed somewhat irregularly introduced
by a petition, it was not on that account the less
deserving of attention. There was no question more
intimately connected with the best interests of the
country, however pre-eminent in importance the free
trade of China, or our colonial relations with the
West Indies, might have been held. The character
in which we should hereafter appear in the Gulf of
Mexico depended on a timely maintenance of the
balance of power, and he was glad to hear the Right
1100. Gentleman state that the subject should
occupy the serious attention of Government. Our
position with respect to the United States was in
itself a topic of considerable interest ; but of this
we might rest assured, the sooner we endeavoured
to set up Mexico as a substantive power, so much
the sooner did we establish a barrier against the
ambitious and dangerous encroachments of those
who were struggling for mastery in the western
hemisphere. In whatever the Right Hon. Gentle.
man said, he was bound to speak in terms of courtesy
towards great Powers ; it was consequently natural
that he should express confidence in the honourable
assurances received from the United States ; but
when he reflected on the American character for
creeping on to power by the specious means of
settlements, he feared that he might not be able to
check its progress hereafter without some better
security than assurances. He heard with great
pleasure the Right Hon. Gentleman's declaration,
that there never was a period when he might antici-
pate greater probability of a satisfactory settlement
of the question involved in this petition.
Sir R. PEEL here interposed to explain, that
the Hon. Member had misunderstood the passage of
his speech to which he referred. What he said
was, there never was a time when Spain and this
country were on more friendly terms than at present.
From this circumstance he inferred the greater pro-
bability of a satisfactory settlement.
Mr. A. BARING proceeded to say, that he
should not have risen to trouble the House, except
for the purpose of enforcing the great importance of
this subject, with which the mass of the country
gentlemen were but little acquainted. If, however,
they would cast their eyes over the exports of this
country, they would see at once that the new States
of America had consumed our manufactures to the
amount of 9,000,000/. cfficial value, when Norway,
Sweden, Denmark, France, and Portugal consumed
only at the rate of 3,220,0001. In addition to which,
he might add, that all our exports to North America
did not exceed 6,000,000/. against these 9,000,000/.
to the New States. It was manifestly our interest
under these circumstances to encourage their pro-
sperity, and increase their power of consumption.
There was no chance that they would ever prove
our rivals in naval power, and in manufacturing in-
dustry they certainly could not be able to rival us
for a century. Our own colonies, so soon as they
attained to any degree of prosperity, immediately
began to manufacture for themselves, and it was
therefore the more desirable that we should preserve,
and extend our trade where it had already proved so
advantageous. Brazil, which was in a state of quiet,
as well as in the enjoyment of a good Constitution,
took 6,000,000/. of our production; Chili,
1,100,0001.; and all Mexico, with equal resources,
but 400,000/.; and Colombia, 510,000/. The
country was presssd and squeezed to death in order
to maintain an unnatural military force: British
merchants were plundered of their property, and the
people were freed to continue in that lawless state
which precluded the growth of rational institutions,
and marred the civil interest of society. Ge, t emen,
were not aware of the general fertility of the precious
metals in Mexico, although the information was both
interesting and important. This might be best
illustrated by the fact, that a single mine worked by
British labour, and in the hands of British subjects,
produced in one year snore silver than was raised in
all Europe within the same period. According to
the estimate of Baron Humboldt, the produce of all
Europe amounted to 233,000 marks, while that of
the one Mexican mine came to 235,000 marks. It
was truly a hardship that property of this nature
where capital, industry, and enterprise were united,
should be left without protection, increasing as it
was every year in value and importance —(Hear.)
The question then remained, whether Government
should interfere now, or wait until an attempt had
been actually made, in which case they would cer-
tainly resist it. He thought the case should forth-
with be met by a frank declaration to Spain, that
interests bed grown up which would render it im-
perative on Great Britain to prevent the future com-
mission of hostilities on the part of the Spanish
Government. In 1779, had not Spain remonstrated
with us on the subject of our North American co-
lonies, and stated that we had no chance of re-
covering them, with further representations that she
had interests at stake which rendered her continuing
to.observe a neutrality impossible ? Did her in-
terference rest there ? Was it not followed up by
immediate war? And yet how could the interests
of Spain then be compared with those which we had
at stake in Mexico 2—(Hear, hear.)—The Right
Honourable Gentleman had disclaimed being in
possession of information relative to the expedition
so often alluded to, and it was very easy to
be conceived that the Minister of Colombia
might say that he had received no official communi-
cation upon the subject. But that an expedition
was contemplated, was nevertheless matter of public
notoriety. The avowed object of the expedition
teas to stir up the blacks of Cuba to resistance, and
the Colombian Admiral himself was a black. Politi-
cal attention had been generally directed for a con-
siderable period to the mouths of the Danube and
the shores of the Bosphorus, but the interests of
British- industry and commerce in reality would be
found to tend more to the coasts of America. The
associations which were connected with Athens and
Sparta might be interesting to the scholar; but to
Leeds, Sheffield, and Manchester, the prosperity of
Mexico was a subject of more importance.
Lord J. RUSSELL could not agree with his
Hon. Friend the Member for Callineton, that we
were bound to interfere with Spain so as to pre-
vent her attack from Cuba on Colombia and Mexico,
as we had interfered in preventing Colombia and
Mexico excifrig a black insurrection in Cuba;
neither did he agree with his Hon. Friend that the
interests of commerce rendered a hostile interven-
tion on our parr necessary, though he was free to
admit that those interests warranted an earnest re-
monstrance on our part with Spain to put an end
to those harassing and useless hostilities towards
her former colonies, from which 110 advantage could
possibly accrue to her, while they seriously impeded
British commerce.

Mr. Alderman THOMPSON said Hon. Mem-
bers were not perhaps aware of the extent of the
British trade with South America, otherwise he was
sure they would at once urge the expediency of the
Government's energetic interference so as to re-
move the very serious obstacles to that trade which
the existing unpacific relations between Spain and
the South American States occasioned. The South
American market presented by far greater advan-
tages to the British merchant than any other he at
present had intercourse with. A taste for our ma-
nufactures had been for some time growing up in
those States, and notwithstanding the existing
im-
pediments to our enterprise, not less than

26,000,0001. of our capital were embarked in our
trade with them, using the term trade in its more
extensive signification.

Mr. BRIGHT contended, that the integrity of
the South American Sums was an object of na-
tional importance to this country, not only on ac-
count of the extensive market which they afforded
for our manufactures, but because Mexico was the
great fountain of supply of the precious metals.
On the question that the petition be laid on the
table,

Mr. HUSKISSON begged leave to observe,
that he had heard the declaration of his Right Hon•
Friend, the Home Secretary, that Ministers were
dully impressed with the importance to the trade of
the country of an unembarrassed intercourse with
the South American States, with unmixed satisfac-
tion. With respect to the allusions which had been
made to Mr. Cunning's interference with those
States, when the expedition against Cuba was
planned by Mexico and Colombia, he thought it
right to state that that interference amounted to an
actual interdiction. It was true, as had been stated
by the Hon. Member for Callington, there were
many modes in diplomacy of expressing the will of
one nation towards another, so that the mere inti-
mation of dissent from a minister like Mr. Canning,
from the measures that States he had taken by the
hand and introduced to the community of nations—
(Hear, hear)—might have in view, would have, as
it had with Colombia and Mexico in the case of the
armament against Cuba, all the effect of an interdic-
tion not to be violated without imminent peril.—
(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Gentleman repeated
the arguments of his opening speech, that it was the
paramount interest of this country that the South
American States should be permitted to cultivate
the arts of peace unmolested by Spain or other
nations. We were the more bound to effect a ter-
mination of hostilities between Spain and her
ancient colonies, a., but for our interference,
Cuba would years ago have been conquered by
Mexico and Colombia. It was our policy also
to prevent North Amer:ca usurping our na-
tural influence with those States, as it would
appear they were inclined to do from their
negotiations, to make the State of Texas a part of the
Northern union. Our trade with those States was one of
great magnitude—the annual exports to them amounting
to 9,000,0001. sterling, which was snore than our exports
to all Europe, and one-third more, even than our exports
to North America. Of the 6,000,0001. of exports which
we sent annually to North America, a considerable portion
was sent on to the South American States; so that in
every way those States were of great moment to British
commerce. The proximity of North America to those
States should induce us to jealously preserve our amicable
relations with them—the rather, as the former showed a
great readiness to take advantage of every event which
possibly might turn to her account, that the revolutions
to which the Southern States were exposed might give
rise to.—(Hear.) It was the interest of Spain herself
that there should be an end to all hostilities between her
and her late colonies; indeed her future fortunes depended
on her speedily entering into pacific relations with them.
In 1779 she had tendered the country her advice to avoid
all the evils consequent upon a refusal to recognize the in-
dependence of oar North American Colonies: in 1830,
let her, as she hoped to assume her proper station in the
scale of nations, act upon our advice, anti recognize the
independence of what were once her colonies, but to which
her empire never can reach.—(Hear, hear.) The petition
was ordered to be printed.

BIRMINGHAM AND LONDON JUNCTION
CANAL.

Mr. BENSON said, that in rising to move that Mr.
Thomas Eyre Lee be called to the bar for the purpose of
being reprimanded fur his conduct respecting the Birming-
ham and London Junction Canal Bill, he had no wish to
interpose so as to prevent that individual front being beard
in his defence, according to the application made by the
Noble Lord in his behalf. On the contrary, he was de-
sirous of affording every facility fur that purpose which
the forms of the House allowed, having no personal hos-
tility whatever to Mr. Lee, and being merely actuated by
a sense of public duty in the part which he had taken in
this business. Upon the general question, all be meant to
say was this, that in all great undertakings of this nature,
it was usual in the first instance to convene a meeting of
the landowners, whose property was to be affected by the
work intended to he carried on, and then, after arranging
the plan of proceeding, to deposit in the Private Bill Office
a list of subscribers for the new Bill, and then to proceed
with the evidence. In the present case, the landed pro-
prietors were not only unconsulted upon the measure, but
when they heard of it they ascertained, upon inquiry, that
many of the names of the applicants were fictitious, while
among others which were genuine were those of porters in
the Stock Exchange and in the alley, who were even un-
able to pay the 1/. deposit on the shares. Mr. Eyre Lee
denied all knowledge of these circumstances until he was
apprised of them on the II th of March. Now he (Mr.
Benson) bad mentioned these facts to him both on the22d
of February and the 3d of March, which was a fiat con-
tradiction of the solicitor's statement. The Hon. Member
here referred to the evidence before the Committee to show
that fictitious names were placed on the list deposited in
the Private Bill Office ; that seine of the other names
were of insolvent persons unable to pay up the 11. deposits,
and that in fact the whole Bill was a bubble scheme got
up under the auspices of Mr. Lee, who was the solicitor
for it ; and concluded by moving "that for such conduct
Mr. Thomas Eyre Lee he declared guilty of a breach of
the privileges of the House, and reprimanded at the bar of
the same."

Lord CLIVE should move, " that Mr. Thomas Eyre
Lee be now called in, and heard at the bar in his justifi-
cation."

Mr. Lee was accordingly called in and beard. He dis-
claimed, in the strongest terms, having been a party to
any fraud in the progress of this Bill. He had strictly
complied with the forms prescribed by the House, and if
there were any fictitious names on the list, it was not with
his knowledge, for he had taken the names as be found
them subscribed to the letters addressed to the hankers for
shares. Upon referring to the report of the Committee, he
likewise found that names were there in evidence described
as fictitious, which he was in a condition to prove were
these of -highly respectable and substantial persons in many
parts of Warwickshire, several of whom he named, but
in a tone of voice not sufficiently audible in the gallery to
collect them individually. If some of the persons who
had written to the banke,s bad made &lee representations,
he hoped he should not be made answerable for the acts of
others, of which be had neither knowledge or even sus-
picion. With respect to the forms of the House, he
wished to observe that the lists deposited in the Private
Bill office were not always deemed final. He had often
known solicitors to alter and amend them before the se-
cond reading of the Bill. In this case he repeated his
declaration that he had complied with all the forms re-
quired by the House, and disclaimed in the most pointed
terms his being wilfully a party to any mispresentations,
much less frauds. The work contemplated was on all
hands admitted to he a most useful one, and as such he
had taken a part in its introduction.
When Mr. Lee withdrew from the bar—

Mr. BENSON rose, and stated that nothing he had
heard had change.' his mind as to the culpability of Mr.
Lee. It was impossible fur that person, after the repeated
warnings he had received, not to know that the subscrip-
tion-list which he attested as being correct was a false
one. He therelore begged leave to move the following re-
solution :—" That Mr. Thomas Eyre Lee, the solicitor
of the London and Birmingham Junction Canal, did de-
posit, at the Private Bill Office of this House, a list of
subscriber,' to the said undertaking, and did afterwards at-
test to the truth and con ectness of the said list, before the
Committee to whom the Bill was referred ; that it ap-
pears by minutes of evidence taken before the Committee,
that the said subscription list is a false subscription list,
and that the same was culpably deposited, and falsely at•
tested by Mr. T. E. Lee, whereby the privileges of the
House had been broken ; that Mr. Thomas Eyre Lee be
therefore called to the bar of the House and reprimanded."
Lord CLIVE next addressed the Howe, but was
scarcely audible in the galley. We understood hint to sa‘.',
that Mr. Le> had erred from ignorance, and not from wil-
fulness; and that therefore, and also in consideration of
his respectable character, the House ought to deal leniently
with him.

Colonel PEEL thought Mr. Lee had been guilty of
culpable neglect of his duty, after the warnings he had re-
ceived of the incorrectness of his list, and he should sup-
port the motion of the Hon. Member (Mr. Benson.)
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN said the present question
concerned not inertly the House, but ai,so the public. Mr.
Lee, it appeared, rested his defence on the score of igno-
rance, hut it was impossible, after reading the evidence,
not to suppose that Mr. Lee was aware of the nature of
the scheme, which was to raise 450,0001. from the public,
and the object of which was only to gain a premium on
the scrip. He thought that the House was bound to
vindicate it* characters and that it should not pass by •the

•

coneuct of an individual who Lid co umitte 1 such a
breac'a of one of its privileges.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY sail, the whole question resolved
itself into this—whether Mr. Lee knew, before the llth
of March, that this was a bubble company, or whether he
was aware that the persons whose names were on the list
were either unwilling, or unable, to make good their sub-
scriptions. Now he (Mr. Harvey) would contend, that
by the evidence given before the Committee, it was shown,
that on the 20th of February, Mr. Lee was cognizant of
the character of those persons. Limier all the circum-
stance,o of the case. he (Mr. Harvey) was of opinion that
it had been clearly e•tablished that Mr. Lee posses.ed
beforehand a guilty knowledge of the character of the
persons whose names appeared in his list.

- Sir J. WROTTESLE• Y said that the evidence taken
before the Committee was very vohiminous, awl very muck
calculated to mislead the House. He referred to the evi-
dence of Mr. Kendall, who stated that he expected to be
secretary to the company; and having observed that there
was no such officer to a canal company, he contended that
the evidence of that individual was unworthy of belief.
The statement of such a fact, he conceived, was enough to
destroy the evidence of that witness.—[Sonte interruption
having occurred here, the Hon. Baronet said, " I hope I
am in a society -of gentlemen, and that a man's character
will not be voted away, without his defence being heard."]
The Hon. Bart. then proceeded to say, that he was glad to
fled that there was the evidence of one honourable man to
be found in the mass of trash of which this book (the Mi-
nutes of Evidence before the Committee) was composed.
He alluded to the testimony of Mr. Morgan. That gen-
tleman stated, that at Levi's death he himself paid 90,0001.
for him—a circumstance which proved that Levi at the
period of his death was a man of substance, and Mr. Lee
could know na more about him. 11Ir. Morgan further
stated, that nothing could be more fair or honourable than
the conduct of Mr. Lee, when he (Mr. Morgan) expressed
his disappointment at the names which he saw on the list,
which, it was to be remembered, had been deposited on the
19th, the day before that occurred. That circumstance proved
that Mr. Lee hail not a guilty knowledge of the character of
the individuals whose names were in the list at that time; and
when he deposited the list, he produced the letters of all
those who had applied for shares. If they should adopt
the course recommended in this instance towards Mr. Le.,
it would be laying down the principle that the solicitor to
a private bill should investigate the property and character
of every individual whose name should appear in his list.
That principle was not acted upon in 1825, when they
had thirty bu!ible companies, of the names of the parties
on the lists of which no one knew any thing. He (Sir
J. Wrottesley) would maintain that this company could not
be called a bubble company, as it was it intended to con-
nect London, Birmingham, and Liverpool, and as the canal
was recommended by Mr. Telford. Mr. Lee might have
been the dupe of others, but as he had received no scrip,
he could have received no benefit from the project. Be-
sides he (Sir J. Wrottesley) was sure that the Noble Lord
(Chive) and Sir E. Kynaston would not have consent d to
become trustees to the company if it were a bubble com-
pany. He let the character of Mr. Lee in the hands of
the House, and he trusted that justice would be awarded
to him.

Mr. SL ANEY said that it was his sincere opinion that
Mr. Lee did not deserve to receive a severe reprimand from
the House.

Mr. TYLER fol'owed in the same line of observation.

Sir H. PARNELL contended that it was not right to
treat this transaction as a bubble scheme ; and that being
his opinion, he did not consider the negligence or incau-
tion of Mr. Lee to deserve the censure of the House,
Mr. C. W. WYNN was of opinion that the conduct of
Mr. Lee required the censure of the House, but thought
that many of the terms which had been applied to him in
the course of the discussion bore a severer construction
than either he deserved or the speakers intended.
Mr. BROUGHAM agreed, that if there was evidence
sufficient to justify the second resolution, a censure, or
reprimand from the chair, was a very inadequate punish-
ment. The House, however, should pause before it came
to a condemnatory resolution, which would impeach the
character of a respectable man, on testimony which the
House had not the means of examining, and must take at
second hand. It was not enough to say that the Commit-
tee, by the word " culpable," meant " negligent not cri-
minal." The question was, what meaning the House and
the country would attach to it. The term implied a guilty
knowledge of the forgery of the list, and the guilty utter-
ing and using of a falsehood. The House, then, could not
stop at a reprimand, but was bound to punish Mr. Lee.
But even the Hon. Alderman would not go that length.
He (Mr. Brougham) had had a high character of Mr.
Lee, from gentlemen of the bar, who were on the Midland
Circuit ; and this character would weigh in his favour
where the question was doubtful. Mr. Lee had been
negligent and incautious, and when his attention had been
called to the matter, he ought to have inquired; but that
he had a guilty knowledge of the transaction, in which
he had acted contrary to his own inte est, he could not
believe. For his negligence and want of caution some-
thing should be said ; but he besought the House, for its
own credit, not to run headlong into an act of severity,
without satisfying itself that guilt was proved.
Mr. J. WILLIAMS said it was impossible to consider
that Mr. Lee had not been hasty and inadvertent, anti that
the act ought to be overlooked by the House. But he
thought his Hon. Friend should sink the second resolution,
and he would recommend that Mr. Lee should lie caked
to the bar, and reprimanded for having, after a deliberate
question and caution from the Committai, undertaken to
i:eswer, hastily, inadvertently, and precipitately, for the
correctness of the list. This amendment would get rid of
the imputation of a high degree of criminalty.
Mr. LAWLEY said a few words in favour of the motion,
Mr. O'CONNELL observed, that the neglect im-
puted was not an innocent, but a culpable neglect; and Mr.
Lee deserved to be censured for his culpability.
Sir R. PEEL said, that all neglect, in such a case, must
be culpable; but as the resolution was worded, courlin,4
the culpability with falsehood, a censure from the Speaker
would convey a reproach upon a professional man highly
injurious to him, implying a participation in the framing
of the fictitious list. The general opinion of the House
seemed to be, that he was acquitted of such participation,
and therefore the House was hound to avoid an infliction
which would convey that imputation. At the same time,
the House ought to exact from professional men a rigorous
regard to the rights of private property. He (Sir R.
Peel) was prepared to agree to a qualified censure on 11r.
Lee, but not such as would imply that he was a party to
the fabrication of the list.

Colonel DAVIES recapitulated same of the clet tils of
the ease, and considered that Mr. Lee deserved a severe
reprimand.
Mr. J. 'WOOD observed that there were other indivi-
duals concerned in the affair more guilty than Mr. Lee.
So much of the original motion as was declaratory that
false subscription list had ken given in, was then agreed to.
Mr. J. WILLIAMS then moved that all the words after
" a false subscription list" be omitted, and the following
adopted as a separate resolution :—" That Mr. Thomas
Eyre Lee, though warned as to the suspicions character of
the said list, did nevertheless, as agent for the said bill,
attest its truth, without due inquiry into the circum-
stances to which his attention had been specially directed."
After a desultory conversation, in which a variety of
alterations were suggested, but none formally proposed,
this motion was agreed to.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
" That Mr. Thomas Eyre Lee, for the said offence, be
called to the bar of the House, and reprimanded by Mr.
Speaker." .

The motion being carried, Mr. Lee was accordingly
Billed to the bar, and informed by the SPEAKER of the
view which the House had taken of his conduct, and then
discharged._