The Sun.
London, England, 1837-12-05 00:00:00

M WARBURTON—Indeed lam not.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER continued
—the Hon. :ile-liner said that all the parties were ready to
prove their claims, and he therefore bad the means of
knowing the amount, but yet he would not wait until be
could ascertain what it was. Was it recant that ties House
should vote an address to the Crown, and thzt there shout(' be
no given sem named, and that the lieuse could not afterwarJs'
be boand in hanour to vote the sum necessary to meet tic
claims?—( Hear, hear, hear.) It was admitted by the Hen.
Member tlett false claims might be got up, that claims
might be fAtieated, if any long flue were given for them to
be made, and yet he now came forward with such a sugges-
tion as tl'at contained in his motion. If the House of Com-
mons chose to go into these claims, and accede to them, it
might but it ‘lo:ild be their act and not his. This case did
net apply to Danish claims alone ; there were ether claims,
F. each claims, and would it not be just as proper that
ey should be opened, and quite as just that a petition
010114 he presented to the House with respect to them to-
morrow? Ho could only, on sitting down, warn the House
of the great inconvenience, of the great peril, which the
r‘urse su gested wield entail upon them. It was not the
ease o 834—the.: there was a d'atiaction drawn and laid
town; but the Hau e was now called upon to give their
sanction, not to claims, the amount of which was specified,
but to undefined claims on the subject of winch they knew
nothing. Oa this ground it was that he felt bound to oppo c
this motion, and he had again to express to the House his
regret for the imperfect manner in which he had stated the
case, but he repeated that he felt it be his duty not to con-
sent to an undefined liability being admitted.—( Hear.)
Mr. O'CONNELL said that the facts of the Cilal were
clear enough. There had been three kinds of property con-
fiscated, namely, book debts, woods on shore, and goods afloat ;
in the opinion of the Law-officers of the Crown the seizure of
the two fir-A.:lamed species of property was in violation of the
law of nations, while those which were afloat did not comic
pi:thin the same degcriptien. The re were thus two classes of
propelY, for one of which the Right lion. Gentleman the
ChancelLar of the Exchequer admitted the parties should be
indemnified by the Government. The sum which was seized
by England w-,s r.ot paid over to the parties whose goods had
been taken by Der: nark, and who were entitled to the protec-
tion of the -British nation, in order to obtain redress. So
the parties stood until It3f, when their claims were first re-
cognised. Some of them were a.almitted, and how were the
others forfeited? By some delay oily, erhich was brought
forward against those who urged them. Thal the British
• nation, from 18)7 to 1834, improperly resis:tal the claims ;
they were postponed by the default of the Governmt2t
and was it not a very small objection, to say the least of it,
now to turn round and say, " We, who represent the Bri-
tish Government, have been guilty of a laches in not at
tending to your claims until 1834 ; but you bare also
been guilty of a laches in not bringing it forward until
now, and therefore you have lost your remedy."—( Hear.)
The notice was first confined to the book debts ; it was a no-
tice that the parties might come in, and if they could prove
their claims within three months, that they might obtain com-
pensation. Now, was it likely that the claimants would incur
the expense of sending messengers to Denmark, and exert
themselves in other ways to establish their claims at a consi-
derable cost, under circumstances which made their success a
mere speculation ? No man in his senses would do so. And
what was the consequence ?' They were turned round on and
told that though they had a right, still, because it had slept
for twenty-four years, no other delay having occurred than
that for which they were not accountable, they should be ex-
cluded for ever from establishing their rights. Was that the
way in which a British House of Commons would deal with
the claimants ? Some said that the amount claimed was great,
others that it was small. If it was great, he was terrified by
the amount of the injustice they were inflicting. That was
just the relson why the claim ought to be allowed. A country
like this should shrink from permitting a great injustice to be
suffered by its subjects. Economy was a good thing, but jus-
tice was better. It was well to see the public purse taken care
of, but not at the expense of the just claims of individuals.
He would say that no case bud been made out for refusing to
allow these people to come before the Commissioners and
prove their claims.
Mr. MACLE AN felt that if he refused the claims of these
parties, he should be doing an act of injustice. What was
the matter of fact ? There were certain individuals proving
-

that, by no act of their own, having sustained a severe loss,
they had been excluded by a Treasury minute from the bene-
fit intended to be conferred on them by a solemn resolution of
the House of Commons ; for he did not find that it was the
intention of the House that the benefit or boon should be con-
ferred on those claimants alone who had lost their book-debts,
but that it should be extended to goods that were confiscated
on shore. What was the course taken by the Treasury ?
They gave notice that proof as to the book-debts alone should
be received fur the space of three months. Subsequently the
notice was extended to cases of loss of goods on shore but
the time given was three months oily, which rendered it
impossible in many cases that the proof could be obtained
in time. Suppose any of the parties had gone to the East
or West Indies, and he knew of such cases.—(Hear.) It
would have taken a month or five weeks to carry the no-
tice that the Treasury had conceded so far as to admit the
proofs, and it would have taken five or six weeks to return
with the proofs. The Right Hon. Gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer warned them, that if they em-
barked in that inquiry without knowing the amount which
might be claimed, they might be launching on a sca of
troubles,-which they would find it exceedingly difficult to get
well over. He would ask, what was the amount compared
with the justice of the case ? Whatever the amount they were
pledged by the vote of 1824 that the money should be paid.
Lord Althorp then eaid, " He hegged to state that nicasures
s'lould be Caked to pay such of the claims as might be found to
be just." That engagement wee not confined to book debts.
The Noble Lord began, as did the right Hon. Gentleman op-
posite, by •sarnirzr the House ; but in this case, ha said, he
felt it to be impossible to resist the justice of the claims. Ile
said his principle was, that if a subject of Her Majesty was in-
jured by an act dcne by a foreign power, contrary to the law of
nations, it was the duty of the Government, by war or by tic-
gociation, to obtain redress ; but if not, at least to indemnify
the party. Did these individuals ask that taxes should be im-
posed to indemnify them ? Certainly not. In this case
1.200,000/. had been confiscated for the very purpose of their
in'lemnification That sum became droits of the Admiralty,
it was true ; but these claimants had a lien on it. Out of the
1,200,0001. received by this county to satisfy these claims,
not more than 200,0001. had been paid. He was as anxious as
the right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the pub-
lic interests should be protected, but he thought they were
never better protected than by acceding to the claims of British
subjccts for justice.
Mr. BAINES inferred, from the tone in which the Right
Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer had spoken, that he
did mean seriously to oppose these claims. If in the year
7834 it was right that these claims should be granted, the
cleimants ought not to be satisfied now with the mere payment
of their debts, inasmuch as the amount of their debts would be
doubled if they received common interest on them for the
period the payment had been delayed, viz., thirty years.
Stu ely, then, these parties were entitled to great indulgence.
To allow only three mouths to collect proofs of claims wide!'
had slept for so long a period was not, in his opinion, a suffi-
cient time. He hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman would not
put the House to the necessity of dividing on this motion ;
but that with the generosity of disposition which belonged to
hint_( A laugh)—he would acquiesce in it.
Mr. WILBE RFORCE said it was not his intention to
occupy much of the time of she House, but he trusted that as
a new Member some indulgence would be extended to him
when lie stated that he rose on the present occasion at
the earneA request of his constituent'', who begged the house
to give effect to the declarations which had be.n made by
Lord Althorp, in his place as Chancellor of the Exchequer,
when speaking of the justice of these claims, If it were
long since th:s debt was iaeurfed, the greater the injustce
of further deferrieg it. If the amount claimed was large,
the greater was the tight which he appeared to advocate.
The question ,yes one of principle, and the l,riihcille had
been settled, and he did nut think that the House would
yield to the argument of the Right Honourable the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer \r lien he stated that they might
find the amount mn: e than they expected, and that the
claimants migl:t be glad to cerrpound—to compound with
the failing credit of a country like this, and to have tal,el
originally the 200,000/., abandoning all further demand. If
he understood rightly, no less than 1,100,000/, derived from
the confiscation of Dansh property, had gone to swell fly
droits of the Admiralty, and why a portion of this sues
should not be made available for the liquidation of the jus'
claims of the pa:ties now before the flou-,e he could not un-
derstand. He could not see the eLseinction Letwcen goods
seized in the I.orts and goods seized on land. In conclusion
he earnestly entreated the House to tender the claimants

justice.
Mr. WARBURTON. replied. He said that the sum
which the clzimants had received did not amount to more than
3s. in the pound of the sum that had been paid into the public
treasury. The Right Hun. the Chancellor of the Exchequer
asked, would they now let the claimants in after a year bad
elcsed, t!u only three months were allowed : but the
answer to tl.i was, that at the end of the three months the door
was cicsed. An the parties asked, was a single week to prove
their case ? He understood that the whole of the evidence
was herr. As regarded the amount, Lord Althorp did not
!reek to limit it; he stated that he would grant all that was
j'l3'. What he required of the House was, that they would
do in this case what they did in the case of the admission of
thQ book debts.
`no CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, no
one Liiividual of the House having sustained him in the effort
he had made to lesist these claim; (and a very painful and
disagreeable duty he could assure the House he had found it)
llear)—he felt that he had no alternative but to propose
to the Hon. Gentleman that he should leave the matter in his
hands, and he would bring the question before the House after
the eases had been investigated. Ile took the liberty of saying,
however, that this must be considered as the proposition of the
House, and not as his.—( Hear, hear.) He objected to it on
principle, and if he thought he was likely to be supported-in
his opposition to it, he would resist it still; but the de-
bate having been proceeded with exclusively on the part of the
claimants, no one individual, on either side of the House,this
being a matter in which party, considerations ail net enter,
having supported him in the view he had taken, he felt that
he should be conforming to what appeared to be the desire of
the House in directing an examination to be instituted, and in
engaging to bring the subject hereafter under the considera-
tion of the House. He must again express his hope that the
House would not throw on him any of the responsibility of
pursuing this course.
Mr. WARBURTON said, as in the case of Mr. Palmer's
motion the matter was left in the hands of Lord Althorp, then
Chancellor of the Exchequer, so he now committed the case
-to the hands of his Right Hon. Friend.—Motion agreed to.