The Sun.
London, England, 1808-02-06 00:00:00

6

IMPET:IAL PARLIAMENT.

z

I

HOUSE OF PEERS,

FRIDAY, I'M 6.-

The Arm!' BISHOP of Yoax
.tOolc the. Paths and
hi 4 Seat.
.His Grace wasNotrocluce;tl between the
fliAcips of Bangor and Bristol.
12ordi Hu7•cIIIN6UN and GLASTONBURY took the
Oaths nod their,-Seats.

. _
The consideration of Sir James Innes's Pctition,
• respcoi,4the 110*burgh Peerages, 14.'14,3111;3011M"
011 Mvtion of Lortl AUCKLAND; when, after
soot, cotwersatiOn with the LORD CHANCELLOR, it
axreed that so touch of the.said Petition as re.
lated.to the; 1),., rages, be referred to the Committee
'. of I), iviteges.
The fridi Appeal, Gould v Langley, WdS finally
.decided; the LORD CHANCELLOR affirming the De-
- crce tit the Iris ft Court of Chancery, with 1001. costs.
Au Accoutit was presented from the Bank of Eng-
Lod, of the Receipts attd Disbursements of the
,Couiignees for the Liquidation of the National ribbt
for the last year.—Ordered to lie on the table.
• Adjourned till Monday ,

ROMA' OF COMMONS.
VIUDAY, Mi. 5.
" • *Thiit Chairman of the Conunittee on the Chippen-
,bain Tlettion; reported that Mr. Dawkins was duly
elected), and that Mr. Blake was not; and that the
/I(,turn. was not frivolous nor corrupt.
Mr. Hase, from the Bank, presented an Account
of the. Expenditure 01.9,500,04 under the Atli' for
the Reduation ()tithe National' Debt, and also of the
Receipt of 2,400,00 pl: to be applied to the same
porpo!e in the next ()darter.
.• Mr. Dawes, from the Bank, presented an Account
of the Amount' of Dividends and Lottery Prizes un-,
-claimed ter the list three quarters.
M. Rost.: brought in a !Sill for the better Regula-
tion Of the. Office of Treasurer of the Navy.--Redd
a first time, and ordered to be read a second time
on Monday.
The third reading of the American Treaty Bill
was poStponed till Monday.
Mi. SWAN rilLiVCd that the Order for taking into
con4ideration the Penrhyn Election Petition be poet-
pored tilahursday t .241h'Mareb.--Ordervd, with
the* consent of Ow other party, signified by Mr.
D. Gtoni.
Mr. Huskissota brought in the Bill for the conti-
nuance of the Laud and Malt Tax.---Read a first
time, .irdered to he read a second time on Mot-
day. Also a Bill for the Regulating the Payment of
Exchequer Bills.
On the Motion of Mr. livsmstiobii it was order-
ed that there be laid before the HoUse an account of
Annutties and, Exchequer Bills, tq be paid on the
sth of April, .1808.' Also accounts of Interest paid
on Ezehequvr

STATE PAPERS.
Mr. WitUriiKCAD.WiShed to know from the Bight
Hon: ,Secretary, tor Foreign Affairs, whether he had
any ni)je,lion to lay befbre'the HOuse Copies of the
toters Iron) which he had read extra in a late
. debate. He was deiiirous to know particularly Wile.
tiler there was any ohje6tion to the prod* lion of
the Letter lrom Gad Ho wick to Mr. Garlicke, and
the Letter from 414 r. Bust, on the subjed of the Or..
tiers 01. Council,. with Lord ilio.,‘"iek's Answer. It
was due in tairneis to Lord Flowiek, as this last bad
been nuts It dwelt upon, to present it before the
House a full and unreserved form.
• Mr. CA KING wished the Hon. Gentleman either
tp mnti a motion or to give notice of one. Re
simnid then know what answer to give. It wain
usual either to make a Communication on these sub-
jects in private conversations, •or to give .previous
notice publicly.
Mr. W rati hA n gave notice for Monday he did
not want any private conversation.
A MLN) It on the Opposition Bench, whose name
we 6,1 11,,,t I,•arn, gave ootieept` his intention to
move on Monday for a Copy of the instructions
tOt.Earl St Vincent, previous to his proceeding
to falhon in the 'year. 1797, and an Account Of What
had been done upon these Instrudions.
HANK ARRANGEMENT.
At the desire of 'Mr. TtatotaY, who stated that
it Would be matter of personal convenience to him,
the' Cu kriCELLOK Of the Eseillt4oSit, always ready
to attend to 3by suggeitiop of the Lion. Gentle.
man, and h3ppy ou this ()cession to skew his readi.
11U33 to py ,itch attentien. In consulting the parti-
cular 'water: ience of the Gentletuan, agreed
to postpone from Monday till Wednesday his in-
tended statement 61 the arrangement between the
Bank' and the Public, with respect to the manage-
meat of the Public Debt, and acuommadation by an
advance. of money.

„..COMNUTTkE UN stirt,Lv.
Soveral gams, including one 10,000,000, one of
boot), on of 1,000,000, were voted for the
Lx chequer Bills outstanding; but Irma
the Low tone in which the whole was expressed,
we cawiot lie pr,xise in our -matarnent.---The Re-
port i 6 to be received on :Monday.
DANtstt SToittts. • • •
T 1 nioyed,, that there be laid before
the 'I. 0u an *mint of. the Naval and' Military
Stor',...s taken pi Copenhagen ; the quality arrd condi-
tion of each description, and Like estimated value.::
pfir. LiosN.ts,);,l sxtw no objeaion'to the produe-
tinn'of the. Peper,,but as the stores were yet unhand-
e,l, it -wouhd be sonic., time betbre the return could
be it car!e.

conceived, that the wishpf Parlia-
ment to have the account mak be' the means of ex-
poditing thellading•--The axount was ordered.

ORDERS OF COUNCIL;
PRuctwAL moved, th'.irthe Ii )use should re...
fy,'lve itself inm a Committee of Ways and Means,'
to tvilieb the 0i rs of Council relating to the Com-
o lerro of NieutiaiNittiOtig should be, referred.
IM :1 PETTY' 'had hoped, that before this
11.14 u Lion should b,t- brought forward some ex planfttory
would liave been produced, and some (Apia.-
til,:tri; statements made to reni.,ve the doubts which
ti ;1S to tilt: legliitta 00 Orders, themselves:
tiv.:;re wore 'doubt to legaliiy,
onsfit. to be' removed,, before tho i3oetiou
asks d for the Ordt2rs tfte Urgu-
; in the present htage wonld bt direiStiAl solely
*ogality, fir the potiry of the'Orders-eould be
tdavenieutV CaiIVCN:6OLi in thoCommittec. Hit

0.1

t

certainly felt great difficulty in eetering into au argu-
went on this head.- riAlearned as he was in the
law, like the majority of the Meinbersof.that
he was perhaps unfit to fortn an opinion oldie strict
legal tight. But since the majority of the House
must be made to feel and to understand the legal) ight
, before they wetild consent to give their sandton, he
as well as any other may venture to state .how far,
according to his opinion, that legality may be doubt:
ed. HO certainly felt how inadeqUatelie.was to op.
pose the Right Hon. Gentleman on a question of
law, and particuAarty when supported by the
other high legal authorities who must necessarily
have been 'consulted on .the drawing tie ,Of the 4
Orders. But no respeel for, any authority Should
deter him from opposing what he conceived to bas
contrary to the la* of nations and the laWs of the ',
land. ,The Privy Council arras limited in :respell to
the orders it may issue by the law of nations, as well. '
as the 'Prize Courts and the Cotirt ofAdmiralty ; and
there as well as every where else the exercise of the
prerogative was limited by fixed rules. This doctrine
Was sanctioned by the; higlicstz legal opinions. It:
would e found in the celebrated letter refe'rro- to
in the Duke of Newcastle's; Paper ,respecting, the
Prussian ships, and signed by Sir Dudley Ryder tied
Mr. Mur,ty. It was expressly down' by these
great authorities, that the Court or Privy Calmed'
was subject to the Law of Nations as well as the
Priie Court 'and the Court 'of Admiralty. There
was besides the principle, that Government was ne-
ver to het:tit/re in such cases, and that DO instruc-
tions were given to Jud,ses. It was the als' inlet) of.
Lord Elden, expressed on an appeal in the last war,
that the Orders of Council were.nothing but -a defi-
nitiou of what was at that time held to be the Law
of Nations, on the particular points of the Declara-
tion. It was theretiire now a fair matter of ineetry,:.
how far the provisions of theQrders of ouneil were
consistent with the law of nations and the law of
the land. Whatever extraordinary do- trines '
arise out of the circumstances of the times, and:
.vhsteyer eetraordinery acts May arise out of those
do6trines, it could never lie allowed that the Privy
Council should arrogate to itself what' was the busi-
ness ofParliament. It was not consistent with the
Law of Nations to seize the ships of ueutrals, nor
could a mere principle of retaliation upon a third
party justify such a seizure. The Order of Coutieil
of the 7th January last year, was in reAaliation for a
Degree of the French Govertimt m. That Decree)
F.9notsted of two parts, one of ,vhich went to pre-: ;
vent the consumption or adotiasitY,ot
tithe other to place the British Isla in a state .
of lockade, This last was indeed a vain boast : it .
was incapable of execution, and no attempt eau been
ever made to execute it. It was a rule Of toe admi-
nistration of public law, that any general principle
laid down, and nut carried into etfed, was to be
cOnsidercxl. as not of fOrce. He •W'is enabled *to
quote, from the reports of 'Mr. Robinson, which
were equally valuable to the legal practitioner for
their accuracy, team chetsical reader lee elegance,
and to poiterity for the admirable style in which they
transmitted knowledge of the must valuable kind;
In these Reports it was laid down, that aluere de-
claration of blockade was not sufficient to gist, cue
rights against infra6tioh of that blockade, unlesS
there was really a force to render that blockade ef-
fe6tual. Was there any terve to render the Decree !
of general blockade effectual on the part of the
,Wrench ?, Certainly there was no reason to suppose ;
that the principle of the Decree would be entorecd
with respea to America, and America was the Nett.
tral,Power that way most to be looked to in the
present question. In the explanation that had taken
place between M. necres, the 'French Minister of
'Marini!, to Mr. Armstrong, the: American Minister,
the intention of executing the restridions at sea was I
expressly disavowed. This successful attempt at
explanation by America afforded' an elucidatien of
the intentions of France. The Order of the 7th of
January, roweled upon this information, was a. re,
taliation of that measure and character which be.:,
came this Country;. and was calculated to be 04..
teal without being injurious. The trade of neutrals)
from one enemy's port to another, was a- thing; by
the restridion of which, much injury way be (lone
to the enemy, at the same time that neutrals conk;
not complain. For by the Order of 175 0; this ptin,
ciplu. was plainly laid down, and neutrals could not
complain when they were only prevented from
ing for Powers in a state of war what theso same
Powers prevented them,from doing in time of peace;
This trade was at once stopped, and a powet of do-
ing mere was reserved, it the conduct of France
ehould be such As to require more, that is; if France
Should be rigorous, 'awl the neutrals should submit.
The' Order of Council in Noyenther was notjustf.i
ftablei but even it' there were a justifiable cause for
it, the policy of at to such au extent ppm that
cause was doulatfill... The explanation given by M.
Dccres, the French Minister of, Marine, to General
Armstrong, the American Mitiister, athounted to au
assurance that there was no intention to eutbrce the
rigours of the. French Decrees at sea. All that was
intended to he executed was 4111 .internal restriction'
against. the adniiision of English goeds, and even the
vessels that brolght those goods are exempted from'
the condemnation that attached to thv .gi)ods, thetn
solves: This' was nothing more than. what every in-
dependent Power was at liberty to do, in the free
exercise of an option to trade with another or not ;•
and though. it may be done with a ho,tile view to-
wards Britain, it admitted not a retaliation in which
neutrals were to be the principal sull'erers. The
Law of Nations and the Law of the !:and forbad
the entrance of neutrals by leompulsion into our
ports, and the prohibition of their stilling unlesswith a licenee. from our Poverinnent. The French
Governmeot required certificates of origin, in which
the articles that composed thecargo were to he de-
clared not British ; we imposed a necessity of taking
lidences from h British port, which were, equivalent-
to a proof that the goods were British. This was
the must etFeCtual mode of promoting the views of
Buottaparte. The entrance into British pOrts, and
the:egress from; these ports were,
,by the Law of
Nations and by the Ltlw of the Land., .perfectly free
and unrestraitied. Leoking beck to the.provisions
mad v by the l.eisititurts.to this' etfed, it would
bes
feinal that this Ireedom of, ingress and
,egress had
been provided for. as early as the ,time ,of
Cl non: Ingress, egrc4s, Mud every freedom of trade
aud ititercourse Was proykled.
.offittsi any prohi-
bition should arise from a higher 'authority, which
was explained by Lord Coke to be the authority of
Parliament. The ?rotes:lion extended to the person

arid the goods, as well in British ports or on British
land as on the , high seas. The statuttai g, 14, and
28, Edw. 111, were specific and ample iu these pro-
v.isions, giving to all manner of merchatits the liberty
01 conveying their goods where they may think
'wiper. The last-mentioned Statute in particular
etiatetedi that 'no ship should be compelled to put
into a British port against the will of the Master and
Owner, nor .be detained there. The Orders of
Col3oell, violated these principles dirc&ly, for by
them neutral ships were to be brought in and de-
tained till they preformed certain 'requisites, .withbut
Which they could not be permitted to sail. The
policy Of ii3llillg these Orders of Council at the pre-
'else time when they came put was ineenceitieble.---
Thereas a dispute with the United States, ir'con-
'sequence of the affair of the: Chesapeake, and it
was ;highly imprudent,to publish new matter of irri-
tation and dispute till the former was arranged and
settled. The provisions proclaimed in there Orders
of Council were injurious and effensive to America,
not only as violating general law, but still more as
they went to infringe a particular treaty ; a treaty
-the more nicely to be respeßed as it had been recently
concluded, and the ratification of it had beep adjourn-
ler, in fad, it was an adjournment of the ratifica-
tion and not a refusel that had been given. That treaty
was pot before the House, and therefore, could not
be direOly referred to ; but the treaty between Lord
Grenville and Mr. Jay, from which the provisions
on this tread, were Cepied, was before the House.
It 'was provided, that Arrericari shipS, which..could
not be aware at 'the time ar their sailing wlnit4orts
wire blockaded, should not be fereibly brought into
the, ports of Britain. But under thl! Order of Colin-
cd..of t 1 1t th November, American ships were
.to be detainkl, contrary to the provisions of
NS Treaty. Aceordieg to the antient, but mire-
Pealed Metutes ha had quoted, ruerchentS were not
to, be molested.- One authority more lie bad to ad..'
Aloe, te;courirm the in iiieiples 'he 'had laid doe IT
this was that of Hale, as expressed in the Treaty
'De Pariah's Maris. Ali Foreign Powers at amity
were entitled to thin freccioia' of ingress and egress,
unless restrained by Ac:t of Parlieeont. Such was
the language of Hale, with this addition, apparently
prophetic. of what had now happuocd, that especial';
care should be taken of the inyrposition.of Aas:of
:Council, as AOls ,of Perliament, •which would be I
'Unconstitutional,' not onry hrthe undue assumptino
of authority, but by levying Malley withuu‘
consent of Parliament, • by' means of licences.. How I
mid Ministers exocii their mutat to be saottion-
ed, hv relerring their ads to the Committee of ,
Ways ;and Means, 'when those ACts ,erein opposi-
tion io the Law of Nations and the law of the land,
to good poll y, and the express stipulations of Trea-
ties, to the express rules of tie Prize Courts, and
the Courts of AdMiralty. It was extremely wrong
and unfair to bring forward a motion of the nature
of that .now before the House, till his*Maje.sty's
Ministers had obtained a Bill of Indemnity, and till
the Orders of Council had themselves been sanc-
tioned.
Sir James Marriott, who hiid so long tire-
sided, in the Admiralty Court, had declared, that
the justice of that Court was to be administered like
all, others, without reference to any orders or in-
struetions from the Crown, or to any limitations,
except those imposed by Ate. of Parliament. Upon
these established principle's of public law, acknow-
ledged as the standard of the condat of the British
Courts of public administration, upon the Ads and
Statutes, and authorities he had cited, he telt it his
duty, leaving the policy of the measure out of the
question, and reserving it for the Committee, where
it may be more conveniently brought forward, to
declare against the Orders. lie considered it highly
derogatory to the. 'chiseler of the Country to see
such things with
.indifference; things contrary to all
law, and not to be justified by any pripeiple of re-
taliation.upon enemies. Till the Bight Hon: Gen.
tleinart should' convince the House of the propriety
of these At s, by reference to books' t public law
and the Stattne Book,' till ho and his colleagues
should hails subMitted reasons to justify a, Bill of
Indemnity; and till such a Bin should have been
passed,-the motion now offered Was highly int-

proper. ' •
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was.
ready to admit, that in the view the Noble Lord bad
• taken, and conceiving as the Noble Lord did, that
the law of nations and the municipal' law of-the
land had.been,violated, the. Noble, I,;.ird was right
in requiring explanation on these heads, before he
eigreed to the Speaker's, leaving the Chair. -:.. But as
lie (the Chancellor of the ' Exchequer) advised to
refer these Orders of 'Council to the Committee of
Ways and Meani, and as 44 looked,epon them ni. I
neither contrary to the -law of nations or to the law 1
.f th,; laud, he was prepared .to maintain the pro-
priety of them to the fullest. extent. The. Noble
Lord wished now to argue the legality of these
Orders of 'CoLipL'il, and to reserve the question of
policy.lo another stage of the business, . But as the
legality was so 'far from' being decisive as to the
policy; in the Noble Lord's opinion, the policy may
as' well be .discassed first and the legality after.
'Fie objeAions in. point of law would not be found
So strung as, the Noble Lord had stated them. With
i respeat to the prineiple that the law' of nations Altd
not admit of any variation, hot by the Privy Conn-
( cil,:as the Noble Lord had by mistake stated, but by
r the King in, Council, ,be was ready to allow that the
prerogative was in that case limited and regulated by
the same .rules of public law as in evert other. It
was the exercise of the King's prerogative of war.
He was free.to.admit, that neither the prerogative of
the King in
_Council, nor yet on Att of Parliameut,
•
nor any-other ad, of any individual nation, could
change !be,general law of nations, established and
acted upon by general consent. Thus, if'the thing
could belegally dime at . all, it was. as, legally. done
now as it conld:he.with the consent of Parliament.
Whatever right there was, may be as fairly exercised
,by the ' prerogative of the Crown, , the. Nation
being 'at war, as enforced by the Legislative au-
thority. The measures that were now ,in force
were suggested by the propriety of retaliating ,
,the aggressions of the enemy. It was extraordinary;
after the example' set by the late Administration,
that the Noble Lord, condemned in Opposition what
li'e' bad: os a Min islet' sanctioned and approved: • The
Noble Lord said, that what was done by the French
Decree'of September was mere matter of reghlation,
dge6tille only' the internal regulations with resped to Britisli,merchandize. If the; Noble Lord thought
really so, he was right in maintaining and detendin4
his opinion. But what was to be lamented was, awl

the Noble Lord was not of, the same opinion now
and when in office. The Order of Coen, il, -ref
striding the coasting trade of France by tweins of
neutrals, was a I.roof that the late Ministers con-
ceived the Order to be executed beyond the bounds
of mere internal regulation. If this was the senti-
ments of the late Ministers, then what had teippened
-since to malze them think differently ?- -Was it the
Jute decree ? Irwas hard, indeed, that having the
authority of those who professed mildness he jeSti,
fication of this rigour, those who had av0w...0 the
necessity of more: naive measures, •sheuld now be
condemned for-haring-followed up that, ;tut hO-
- santliened. He ceferred .to. former, tietei thus
far, only to show that the policy now enforced had
been recognised and stied upon bye e late Ministeri.
The decree Of Buottaierte declared the British bleeds
in a state Of blockade, and subjected British propertt
to cdrifiscatiOn. This was certainly, as far as regard-/
ed the blockade, a vain and empty boast. The Nob
Lord stated, on the triscchceived anthcrity of hif
Learned Friend- (Sir WiltietneScott), that a declare=
tion of blockade, it not followed up by an athtet
blockade,
.was •of Ito force in law. That may be
the case With respect to a single port but when
whole courney, was declared in a state Of bloCkade,
the inability to: enforce that blockade in its full ex
tent, proved that the declaration was intended to
'ley a grotind for the infliction of the consequent pe-
nal ties. The French Decrees nlledged es the ground
on which they proceeded, the Sft of our dcclaring
and considering as blockaded, ports befOre.
Mere was not a iingle British,ehip of war, and
the extension of that: principle they declared oar
whole Empire• to be blockaded. Not a step
taken on our part to eounteraet this.principle,
was acted ttpoil and enforced by the enemy. The
Noble Lord-had no authority to bear him out. II
the -Noble-Lord, was prepared to contend, that the
enemy's Decree did not admit the ineauing his 'MS-
'jeste's MinisierS 'affixed eti it, what ',did . mean
But when they sew how it was worded and execut4
it Vi%li too much to Contend, 114 it the Pared
foabribolcokcakdaidnigegfotrhcee!lernit,i‘si
rhc}!.l.l•.l,bt;aiti,
d;
5..11 •
-masks: the approach to any-port of
..thgni lia4;u•dotts,
it was not: to 'he ,regnriliel• as-of -three; • France as-
sertipg, that ...w."ptit,,Ports.:ik ii;stote of .UlbcEt;isle,
without a blockading-force, and. assuturng the right
of opposing an enemy -with every 511 and every'
weapoe he used, published, the blockade of the
whole BritiA bleeds. What was, to be inferred
from thin, but that with Out ships to render_the ap-
proach to our coasts hazardous, the enemy wad&
assume the right to detaiovessels approachiog them,
whenever he could cateli4 hein.. Ail trade- in Eng- ,
lisp goods was prohibited, had all such-sweats,
ever found, were declared lawthl prize. But the
noble Lord-said this was of no moment, as the, in•
ternal execution of the Decree in Feance' was all that
was intended. - It was rather singular, however, that •
the first newt. of the publication of the Decree, .at
Berlin, reached this country with'an aceount
having been rigorously enforced at Ha inetegh, Hato- ,
burgh then, as ;he noble Loal hinted across the ta-
under the fume,. of France, but reduced
that power for the exprfss piepose of entorcieg this
rigour of this Decree againseßritish commerce ,acrd
pods. The santlity of every neutral the waS tQr.
1101 h, to be most eereceirniously tc:spead.4 at 43.;
and every right and every principle of neutral teal-
tory was to be violated by land. The dtitiliCtioO W;l4
the more extraordinary, as the eigouteof the Deccost
seemed, to apply more to property at sea; Witt
ecution was so' rigorously enforced on bad where it,
may have been supposed not littended to be "
enforced
at all. Lei the House recollea. Beurenue's declara-
tion at:Hamero',. that all who carried on trade With
England supported England, and On that account the
French were compelled, however reluCupily, to
rake
possession of Hamburg') ; that all Eoglish goods
must be produced by the Tlamburghers. for the Fur'
!Nap of being'confiscated, and in 4 hours.i.lotaiealart
visits would be made, and punishment inflicted
the disobedient. Was.rlik.COlith)ing the. oper08"
of the Decree to French tell ivory ? Ire whet manner I
did Buonaparte explain the Decree to thelderettatitE
of liamburghe who stated that •al great part of
•goOds seized belenged. to them, and that the ma-
sums lie was pursuing were prcgtsant gri%Lter
ruin to him than to his enemy ? 'eToefestroy tb°
commerce of the vile Bugled), said he; it in ewe/
possible wet, is my object. r I have it in tey poser
I wish. to ruin Hamburg(' ; fur that.would proinotc
tbts th'ilritaion of Eti4liih ceminerce." The cow'
St ruct len put upon this Decree by other eountnee by
Spain for -instatiec; in the rummer in 'which sl!e
adoi)led itk proviinhs, proved tro, doubt wits enter'
tabled by theta on the subie:L But it was conteald‘
ed the whole of the reasoning deduced from Oleo
has wes done awe), by, the riprc.,sentatiou Mock ill
the French Mioister of Marine, Deerisi, t.,
ArmstrouL, 'lbis was the revocation with wapitis
neutrals oeutralsought to have been satisfied;
have induced this country to retrain then any ,
sure of retaliation I Demi stated as his Oiiittipti"-'
his opinion merelye—not his knowledge—that
Decree did not alter the praiitice of nentraenaviea-,
tion—ihat it did not afk the American coli"1111441 '1

with France, nor alter the mode of mat 74
tnre. After having stated this Liii.;olltart4",
opinion, he proceeded to esphin some or
ditty articles of the I:),tcree, but on the in.ht ittateria
point referred Geri. Aram rot ig to the i ulster of k."r -
ternal relations !'.ltevide4ll, thervfore,
tendency of this French Decree was such as he ltael
stated, he maintained we had a complete right to rr,
tahate upon the county their awn measure!. : if itue.
enemy declared we shonld have no trade--it.
proclaimed British tnaut.itithire good pt "-
a right to declare Fiend) inanutaciurea good
Who Were interested in this sithied and CaPabie
"l. •
appreciating it ? In the first place thu enemy, 2?
the Gentlemen opposite who toothed the last
'nitration 3dly, the country at large; 115 &it-4
their representatives in that House ; and chip bed.
Aral nations. The opinion of the first was least nia7
teriali but still it became of soute,consetittence to
know what he bad professed to, be a principle 0r t a
law. of nations. He had professed that by 11131 jat's
country had a right to oppose,' its eiterny with Ida
own weapons. As tar therefore as liuunaparte wa.A
concerned, his Majesty' Government waS warrant
atl
i their proceedingi on the principles be hittlielf had •
protease! ;: (tidos he fotinded his argument 01 the
assertion that we bad first infringed the 1"1, by
I lot:
posing a blockade. What be meant by that was
1,-/
very evident; probably t w blockade of ottelatur'

. . _ ~. .
extent, meritoriously fOrmed by- the Administration
in which the noble-Lord 0009itM)olle sot).inAu ish -
a part. Ile cattle now to the second Opinion, that
of the lost Administration. He was desirous to shew
the House. that if there was meaning' in word's, or .1
inconsistency in-men:finless the Order of the 7th
Jan. couldbe interpreted' away, as had been attempt-
ed to interpret away the, French Decree, his 2401,
ty's Government, in issuing the Orders, had A 1-4,lit !I
to be perfealy 'sitisfied, that howeverthe policrof '.l,
them might be questioned by't hose who wereparties.
to the former Order, to the principle they could have, :i
no objeaiim. He could also adduce the authority of
that House in Confirination of his opinion. 'On his
own Motion for the formal prodiattioti•of the Order .;
of the 7th of 3anuary',, a long discussion had taken
place. Not one word did he or any other Member
urge against the justice or the legality of that Order. I
It was distintily argued as a question 41 policy ; and
it teas contended by the Gentlemen opposite, that the 1
principle on which it proceeded was not further ex, I
tended, because at that irme- a further extension was
unnecessary, but that -defiling would prevent such an
extension' should it becoMereqni'site.• He read the
preamble of the Order, which asserted precisely the
-ri,lght whieh'his.Majesty's present Ministerii. now -as- '
serted, thetright of retaliation. Indeed what else could
it be For all, that recital could never have been made
merely for the
,purpose of asserting a right which
the4;dinary usage of war enabled. us to exercise. The
arguments, therefere, of the, Noble Lord, bore as
strongly egainst,t he Order of the late Administration
as against the Orders of the present. Adverting to
the Noble Lord's reference to the Order of 1750, he
contendedotiat he was completely mistaken in that
reference.. Th. Coil-sting trade of France was pro-
hibited in 1'756, on this diStinEt ground; that neu,
irals hadn't) right to,catry on that coasting trade for
gianee,..in,Wa.i which France • would have carried
On herself in peace. With respea to the nature of
the retaliation, ,was it to be Confined exaelly to the
,Course' pursued by the Enemy ? If the principle
of right, to retaliate Wereadtuitted, it triUgt also be ad-
mitted that we had aright to cause pur mode of re-
taliation;' other \vis'in many instances, retaliation
would only enforce the clestrut ion Of -the .Power re-
taliating. Suppose a fortress was besieged, this fortress
. liapplied with water by two itrcanis proceeding- from
4 neutral conntry; anti4uppose that the ~bestegers
entered the nett •a 1 country, and' diverted the chan-
Ile' of one of these streams, would it be . advisable
retaliation, for the besieged to enter the neutral cowl',
try, and divert the.channel of the othefstream? The
French had declared England should have no trade
'with , I. _. . ..,, ' -mild.

3 MU

tional concessions on Our pat:t 4-ere introduced into
it, it would not iv- pwited? wct bound to ad-
hereto the sti Pkrlatcrsd of this'Treaty erele was con-
cluded, and while it was -ttriliilg backwards and for-
.l.lArits;-IrOnt clUatter of. globe to the Other ?
In imitation of the Noble Lord howould,say a few
werds,, at present, on the policy of the (pliers
*hat was 'the 'state of the two' countries of Great
Britain and Frarieekoth reseed to 'Previous.
to the issuing.of theDiders :(ouncile France en-
jpyed, , fad the assistance of. Neutrals, a.sgreet '
vateig,?s of trade as We possessed with our tri-
utni)liant navy: Ofirrinvy,, indeed; as belligerent,'
w. 1,1 'LW:waII:IA, and rendered. Ustflesi by neutral-
•ships•Carviing t(? France all that it was '
important for,
'France to obtain. This had been, the case .for :so
lOng'e period, that even prior to the Decree of the
t st of November, it might have been matter of
dcliclitc!inquiry, whether this Country 'ought, not to.
have resorted to the. measure of 1756. But surely
the Noble 'Lard must s•e, that after the" issuing
of the Decree of the Ist Of November, -a much
stronger measure was necessary. Otherwise French
property conveyed in neutral bottoms would have
been safe. British property in danger.—lt had
been declared, that the' French •Decree..weisla dead,
letter, and that. it .was easily evadecL , He was well
aware that the Certificates of Origin gave oppor-
tunities, by the assistance of forgery and perjury,
for the introddlion of out' goods on the Cominent.
Such practices, however, were not to be encouraged;
and so far from its 'being a dead letter,..France' was
from time to time supplied by ne„w provisions fur
the deficiencies "of the Decree. The diflrent coasts
had been lined with' tnlopi, and other .'means of
improvement front tune to time recurred to.: Among
the arguments which had been urged' against the
Orders of Council, it had been contended that they
were the cause of the distress which our, manufac-
turers experienced. It had been said, that France
had shut the door against our commerce, hod that we
had bolted it. But every one who was at all neguaint-
ed with the subje6t, 'enust know. that. the pressure
which our manufadures sustained' was antecedent
to 'the promulgation of tlie Orders,' and that ,it
originated in the French Decree. If we entertained
a hope,- that the great inconvenience sustained by
the Continent for, want of 'British'. manuladureS;'
might produce a resistance to those measures oh'
the French Government by which they Were ex-
eluded, otir policy evidently was, by increasing that
inCOnVenience,- to endeavoUr to force a, market.
—lt was: impossible to say to what extent the: at-,
bitrary power of France Might compel the coun-
-.der' her dominion to consent 'id their

war, Which authorised the ailtnission of .certain cr.
indiwgnsable tops, dpd 4otr),
v ho.? articles NV.Cqq,. tuTbe,4etfirte'd :in thrlcitig,';`,
I.ieenco; 'rite 'ipecia6sllo the late Or Ni- :WYS
not t•otitinedtJa feW. article;,btit con)preh 4. nde-i*the
\YhJ: book of iatei, ithd thc.l.reby,suiprLled all the
navivatil..e. laws, whicii the t-ifiner Cl'se were but
partlailly.4ifted, and thiS the shadow of an'
AA ‘vhich let in but three or his viL!ws,
rued any. party
or any intention, to sweport any. set ,of men. The
que3tion was,'' whether the Orders were right or
not, and t:le deci,ion ought, in his, opinion, to: he
submitted to Parliament. lie had no hostility to
the Right Hon, Gentientan, but tie felt an • irrecon7
cilable enmity to the unconstitutional manner by
which they' hadcome into pewer. Though fitlona7
parse
may be guilty of injustice, that would not be
a Justibeation of them in imitating his aas. Such' an
Enemy ought-to he resisted by A determined courage,
not b) a6ts of violence. it, behoved this Legisla-
ture, before the Order's' could have any etfett -upon
foi'cign nAtions, • to ascertain whether they were,
right, - gis Right Ron. Friend had stated, that theSe
Orders were in retaliation of the tneaSures ot the
nemy, upon, the same principle as tile thder,Of,the
7th January, 1807. Rut 'he contended', that theY
:could not be considered as measures at retaliation),
became the French L)ecree of thefts; of Not ember,
.1806, had never been aEted upon, so as to require
Such a retaliation. In proof Of this be' quoted the
answer el the French Minister of Marine tattle ap-
plication of the American Minister for an explana-
tion of that Decree, in which it was stated, that the
Dante did not. alter the maritime law of France
with respect, tQ. caetnres ; that American Ships
would not be.ciptured when passing between the
ports of America and England, and that it was only
:the entrance of snch Vessels into the Ports ot'.France
.with English goods, which amounted to a breach of
the blockade, that would subject them"to capture.—
Another communication, on the same subjed, dated
the 2.4 th, of December, gave a positive explanation,
as the.previous one had ti negative explanation, that
Neutral Vessels, coming (ruin-England or her Colo-
nies, wonld• not be received in the ports of France;
and, if deeded in endeavouring to, evade this De-
cree by false, Papers, would be confiscated.; so that
the Decree of the L',lst of November had not been
acted upon in France, from the time cif its publica-
lien up to September last, in any manner to-call for.
the retaliation by our Orders of. COuncil. The De-
cree had been adopted in. Spain, and in that country
too it had. not been executed tiny more than in
thoriseilieJneasures

lave

o as to aul

_.4 theme W' deelared, that then they shot.. .ear own France, in any way
110 trade at all, With regard to neuarals, it was an ruin. It; rance could exclude our goods from the that had been.resorted to by thus -GovertEnent• The
".. afetinded as,ertien,:that though we .had a right to 1 Continent, they. 'would have been excluded had case of the Vessel, the Shepherdess, an American,
Ileetretheenetnr, we had no: right to injure theenee our 'Orders never -appeared,. If they were ex- with a cargo of Luglish enerehandize, Which, after
lY by iheaUS ebat 4pnld •bte• prejudicial to neutral • eluded, we must look to the rest of the world; of an appeal to the Admiralty Court of Madrid, had
.cowees..TheLlait Adm ,
iniStratioe by their own Order the trade with which, by those very Orders, we had been-released from a Spanish port, he stated to de-
4,,eknowledged ehie assertion tosbe unfounded—that secured a Monopoly. By that trade we muse endea- 'monsteate that fact. There was no justification of
Urger w;l3 prejudicial to neutrals—but•'were• they ' your to compensate .oerselVes for the loss of Conti.. the Orders of Council therefore in the condua of
'ehiliable for that? Cerelinly eot. The question in a , nental commerce.. With teeard to the effect which the Enemy. As to the case of America,' it Was his
.
~ ..,
ease of this kind-was; is the injury to Neutral Pow- ; these Orders might have on our relations with iktne- wish that we should.relax.in our rights in her favour
erg only consequential on measures direaed -against rice, that was a most important 'subjeet. Some per- as much as our circumstances would ;Ault of; and
the Evenly, .oris • the . measure: originally directed sons apprehended, that they might induce America here he was ready to deny the applieetion of the
aVinst Nentral Po'wers ? The ere-idea of the last to go m
to war with us. 'He trted not; he believed principle, that we had Ito right to search Neutral
•e. Administration, in blocking upet whole river, one not:: no qne would regret such in event more.than Merchant Vessels for any thing but contraband of
sick
.of whichv was occupied by Neutral Powers, himself. He was far from entertaining the "mis- war. ' The insult to a State etinld•Only be offered by
Proved that they admitted theijustice of this deCtric e. taken idea, that we Might redeem out own . losses searching a 'Vessel of the State i the search at a
It le e e
. '"an'emoCo 'conteed4 that 'We should havo,walted by the. eufferings of America. Loss to America was e private Vessel might amount to a prn,lte injury, but
I' owe'-‘?
of the Ill'e.ncli Decree on Neutral' • 7 loss to Greet Britain-a .He wished to prevent war could not be considered a public iusult. As to the
tk(),w"-‘.? (,)r.,N,vhether Fi•;ince..inegtided to • put it in • ,withAmericaefer althenghthe Mischiefs which Arne- certifitemes of origin, hie Right 'Hen. Friend• Must
btce• Trle. last Administration had not elone so'. •rica would .suffer: by wee, must nest be kit by her, know, that until Lord Auckland's Te:_aly, they
...,I:attlirk 110reinotistrated against the grder of the -► they would eventually be Mi by us. The prosperity unitarmly, required in the ports of France, and in
71" Jane as initiriow to her trade, and WOW' Si) fa'r , of America was tile prospetity of Great Britain, nod tune of peace. On all these grounds Ito ideauld agree
•'nn,3 t‘'' Si)! sale;WOUld resist it. 'ln the speech of the , he was. as anxious to preserve,peace with Ai rica, with les Noble Frleittl ite opposing the !Speaker's'
.`'
''''sidot of the Uniccd ;states, l't ;vas described es a- consistently with , the rights and interests of 'this, leaving the chair becaese he thought that this wits a
109ss' yieletioteOf:•the Law et: Nations. lf, therefore, couniryi as. any man,. As he hoped chat Poe!' question upon which his M
i ___ajesty's I.\,litmiste,rs • ought
the Gentlenieu opposile did not.,
abandon their own . might be preserved; ha believed that it would be pre- to fortify themselves with the strength of Podia-,
: principles, or.-aNicl,hiltujig.i.,:iiict. not mean to pot in served; for if any enlightened view existed in•Amee ment and the sense 'of the :Nation, et- a time:
„-f.°•,.r.c° tjle measetewhicb they bad promel,aa zecl; they. rice of the prineiple of the measures which welted • when
~the eyes of the World were upon their pro- •
had tie right to' icete:e his AI Ijest's present Mini.; • adopted, it was impossible that they could be thetause ceedings. - .
-slurs orOFccip'ktatio ii. lie trusted latel had., "etisfieci the , 'of war. It was impossible that the 'Americans cotild' The 411 ASTER of the ROLLS observed, that
/..y _ ,
‘,,,. ~.
tare
-14,1tiSk,, that pieOdtici "of these Ordereof Council look at the ;orders of Council,, without perceivibg. there were sonic of the Papers' with the contents of
•
' '‘'v-a3:c°6lPletelY .I.lstifiell by the Law of Natione, titc.l in them many instances of caution not to injure Acne- which any lapse at -time could tn not alce the House,
111ai pg. ine,istires of ~....11. they were also constitation. '+, rica There were various eiteeptlous in diminution better acquainted, and If there were, ns Ilia Learned,
Vie •t,ustiCible, Lining been taken by time Head of- ',of the'military etlea at those Orders which showed. Friend had stated inconsistencies in the Orders, they,
_lmeli,xeCutive Governin°,;nt in the due exercise•of his -that we were desirous of doing as little injery t ,b . Might be correeeed without being any cause of de-
, .tLoyal prerogative. But the' Noble Lord also con- I America as po;sible. *lf the Noble Lord, on a re- lay. His Learned Friend had said, that his Ma)es-
:lectuilved that these Orders were illeval, as contradiet-• view,of the argent:tents hoot just been urged, or 'e Ministers ought to go forth -on this of:Cession.
'. •lf . jugh3 Ch"ta' 'a"(1 ale Statutes of Edward lII.' :on a recolleCtion of his former impressions on the with the whole strength of the House of Comnions.
_orsti•i:tis,../r rested on the same grounds as to the. subjeeti came to doubt whether he was jtistitied in It was about a twelvemonth since, that 'a treasure,
reehlehrtl"k")°"'"'—thL'Y were
tillatares of war ch.trgitig the I).ritisli Government with acts of vio- of this sort had been refused.even to . the. tetspeCtion.
, .
am., with
e etc) was Qutitled by prerogative to take, lence towards Neutral Nations, it would be for him of the House of Commons, and it had then been
t er enemies.. .
i Ith
which it was tit's ' ' ' ."
. ert that those to consider,- what kind of impression might be made said, that to call for such a Paper woddhe to inter-
..
..
statutes should i '
justifiable in takine e -
measure;
would not 4.. I. Ki • - h. 'on America by the. notion that a great part of the fare with the condua of the war, and a denial of that
Comm ,
,„hl ,or forpolitical expediency Only: This. no* Under -discussion. was one against whieh, on no ground could be laid for its production, and there
' .
been interferencei wit It tie'atrai properly lead necsaaray , • ewer y priecipleof honour and.dignity, the Americans Farlirtrueet.ought not to he possessed of it in ft shape
an d'' Praaice: of all former win.s., or how could ought-go take exception. ,If such an impression, that could make it the subject of discussion., He
_,v/ , ockade have been etfeeled ?By every blockade, under such an authority; Were to go to America; the was surprised, therefore, to' find that his. Learned
, - Iliad ithli d:interKned with Neetral' Powerst'sioce "'LI conseiltienees might tie highly injurious to .both Friend had refrained from giving his ielvice till this
' part bi-irealene4 the ships of Neutral Nations in the countries. He recetinnended these, Consideretione i dey upon the subjea, and that, entertaining the
to dolt it. with Confiscatien if they attempted. tp the attention of any Honourable Gentlemen who ! opinions ho did, he had not endeavour-id to recall
ee,cl‘ la' ai.'• his Majesty's eresent Ministers had might• he preparing to support the Noble Lord's ar- I the' late Ministers from an Ott which he considered
. • cularlet the statutes of Edwakd M. and -parti- gutneuts. 'llia British Government bad •boen aetti- li unjustifiable. His Learned Friend. 'had- ridtnittede
'... , New! Tth..le 28th. of Edward 111, to which the ated by no spirit of jealousy or, hostility against that on A principle ot retaliation, Meesuree, of this
, - eierd called • his 'mention. with so' much neutral Powers, more particularly against America. hind were tustiftible, and he agreed with his Learn-
mpnasis ' l - . '
, •, no ess hed ' they b6ett' minted- by the ' 'they had merely dyne that which. it was their duty ed Friend, that when such ineasureS were to operate
.I\loble
i ,by neither
- • L"l'd and his friends. But the •faCt was, • -to do, in consequence. of the measures that bad been upon iuuoueot oeturals, it oughtto be gietye
.matter
,
-related 'Y'
to a Part had. they been . violated, fur they adopted by the enemy-for the destruttion of the of consideration whether they should be resorted to.
state of at and not of war. 'With country. -•'- - - . ' - • His Learned Friend had stated, that such measures'
Nii ;eel
ze I to .the .fitepe teken in consequence of theought to follow the acts of the enemy, oteotherwlse
' ' Dr Lilik HENCE contended, that all' the ergo-
:el ei Itch Certificates of Origie, signed bya Fr,..gich 'Con-. ,they would,not be
in
of retaliation. With this
me which • had. been used by has flight Hon.,
2' 11.14. given to nent•;al vessels, for' thiS prirp6se of dodrine he agreed in part ; but when the Enemy,
lo'rietid, mide in IhVour of the' principles araiiitained
Preventing their seizure. by French .cruizers; it by by bis Nobi6 vrielut. -if eve, ti„tre „„,, „ erisig, departed (Mill justice, he wes of _opinion that we
tiCcepting these Certificates neutrals gave ette4'.l to the . were justified is retaliating in subtattee, and not
retaliate.
of Fraecee we, had undeubteilly a rieht to. : when no measure of'nr.:mgnitoiie; that might tffet.t
bound to adhere to the term. And he was surpris-
the area interests of the COuntry,oUght not to 'Kiss
.As to any,interference which the 04ters -:etl, indeed, to hear the Nohle Lard who opened this
Witi7out thesedulousettentiOn of Parliarnent, it isas ,
in Council might have bad with the Navigetioti LaWs, • the peea,„„e .debate, put the .construction be had upon the.Frettelt
The Ordeia of Council shuuldbc con- :
'me wished that sobjea to be distinctly argtmea '. 1. )qt ' sideaed in three T'peante of eieaa : ist, As 6 th,.ii. , Decree of 1806,because that ,construetion took away
i_ot•on that night. (..'onsidering the extent of those.all justification from the Order of the eth of San.
-simplicity or complexity; idly. , As to their legality i
tys. it, was VOL imposiible but spree pert -of themlll67. It wee matter of astonishinetit to bias .to
-It to the illildielpal In,aw of the Country , .
,i_"l64t have been, infringed: Bet. if they evere inter- heat any one who had uttered t syllable in
.sepport
atel :elle, As to their legelity etceordingto the Lat
lerted With, it was only as they frequently had 'been of Natione 'tale: number and variety of the Orde ."-, of the Order of 1,807, objeti to. the Orders then (tu-
be... ore, .in instinces in which' Parherne:neasontetiines der consideration. The eery preamble of the for-
ai-el Expktnatory Orders created _ much Corneleeiii .
altought indermiimy eeceeSary for, the Measerea that trier Order wits a refutation of the. Noble Loyd's,
awl contusion, and there were Many objeetioas to .
hadebeen adopted, and sometimes recognized tee lc- ' e r.arguments. That preamble stated the,gross iujus-
t,,heeenepares'OTehem,ionie of vshich even went to
gaiety, of these measiiresi: -I?,k,en had-he been.A•tare,lice of the French Decree to be the found 'of the
.otete these Orders were originally • their legality."' ' Their meteaference isith the freer
Order. 'The Noble Lord and his Leltriled Friend cone
is'''oed that theY ;Anil s.:eurity of fereign rnerehants",vis inconsistent
vthltitaied some of the provisicns of 1"::0 mmv igat ion laws, . with the ar,,,,,keyea of ere tea ceee.e.e eeecta or. tended not that France ,dtd not understand the Dee'
aer,in.wclul`,l'llol t'aie Witiellelci hi in Ireful theiF adoPa ditch til.li every facility ,Imonid
_ ~tnetAnother iopite on Which. the'Noble Lord .de- i
, nwichatit•; tractility in roo.reliailtilT,o ,', n:si .„:41...;,•,,> Orders proceeded; bit that no person residing the
'be o'ivt±n 10 o;e6 ceee, according to time eonstrudtion upon which the
cia.l I waa, that.by these Orders:we had viol ', , e ~,• •:. , •''' , . - ~- , ' , ' , rill. •ellact''d could understand it . so. Ferhii pert, 'he
eue Treaty
witi ,
.. . Vie; • , I), 0 1,.-iti, toat is pi: pp,II:11/1.,` I:1W. . lint this 1.i.":.: • ! , • 4-. 0
lioll could be pelt
IteatV -i 1 "I'll• Ice" s that to be cailt'd It i lily of the' 01-(14-s, mil. ilii inin(l, arose princevhe , eould,not see what other construe 1
- watelt wits not z.ttifiCd-..-Viliiel).,,Vas reiOriled 1, i',"") lie ei,- eter •_ - rat , ,
~‘•. of the- -, i .. e : upon it ; and- emir-Ml.)ly the Gdeereiment of France
eint . e usta use toe _ate
~ • .... .% i • silly-----------:-.
ta'thi-11
) -"ark/ with a deelaratioHiatt' le- eidti-
te tto *ea. I. LViljeity 11Trif pfoeeealles on e `ptecedent in tee eite... N, as not in the-haw or meltingoe treneeaereuetee
.
. ..... . , . . .

. ;~: