The Sun.
London, England, 1822-03-11 00:00:00

presia t is attempted t 0 be supported ; I say attempted, because
now • ae futility, -of the systain is exposed. It was then said,
" thare is no danger. froni-this ; let America remain on the
foot at on which it stands; let its trade go on in its old chan-
nel: twill find its level, and can never. hurt es." Why, Sir,
thie gas all very plausible general reasoning, but had no spe-
cifk application to the plain matter of fact of the case ; be-
cause it was well'known that it would injure the trade of- this
country, and, with that sense of it in the opinion of those who
were best qualified to 'form one, the proposed measure was a
bad one, it was opposed by the -general, and almost unanimous
voice of :the country ; and for that very good reason, no at-
tempt was made to- carry it into execution. So far from it,
that the very first measure which the Privy Council adopted,
was a measure of restraint to prohibit it, and they then ex.
pressed their opinion, upon deliberation, to be, that this was
a plan which it would be unwise to adopt, or rather that it was
a measure in which it was wise to depart from its adoption ;
and it was held still further, that if any thing was brought
from America to us, or taken from us to America, it should
never be done.but through the medium of British ships. So
much for the similarity of circumstances in the two cases ;
in one of which there was much emergency, and, in the other,
none ; in one of which, all the circumstances were owing to a
revolution in the affairs of a state ; in the other, all the cir-
cumstances arise out of an established course of things; and
gentlemen do no even contend there is any emergency in them ;
yet, eveti with all:1111dg arguments for the proposed measure in
the former case it w 14., rejected; and now, without any, it is
proposed .for our ailoplion: But Gentlemen contend, it is
needless to examine, or even to dispute, the necessity of this
Measure; heeause it'is known—they contend it is knoam—they
contend it exists beyond dispute ;—that the facts are so plain, it
is idle to dispute their existence and that nothing can be a
remedy but the provisions of the present Bill. Hence, they
say, -arises the necessity. The facts, however,- on which this
necessity is founded, they do not give us now; they either do,
or they do not, know of the existence of this necessity. If
they do know of the existEnce of this necessity, they can con=
vey it to Parliament; and if they can, they ought, to convey it
to Parliament. • It:is their duty to convey it to Parliament, to
justify the adoption of a measure so repugnant to our esta-
blished laws. If they have no knowledge of this necessity,
we are legislating in the dark ; because 'they ask, us to do so,
and that against every principle of policy by which this
.country has been guided, and by which it has hitherto so sig-
nally prospered. • No*, Sir, under these impressions, I could
say, that Instead of pursuing the system recommended by the
Noble Lord, we ought to call on him, and those who, with
him, are the frienda of this Bill, to point out to us the instances
in which this House has sanctioned, or even countenanced, a
departure from the Navigation Laws. Sir, it has hitherto been
the policy of this country to regard with jealousy every proposi-
tion to that effect ; to require a reason for any measure that has
that aspect ; and to regard every measure with distrust, if it
has that apparent tendency. But the friends of this Bill take
a course directly the contrary ; they take up the navigation laws
as a hostile system, and if they can find any measure in our
legislative history, which they think has any tendency to oppose
it, they consider it as a matter of useful discovery, and exult in
it as a matter of triumph, as if an attack on the Navigation
Laws was not only perfectly fair, but even laudable. They
think they have made a valuable discovery, if they find out a
precedent for an attack upon the Navigation Laws ; -and so far
do they carry the spirit of hostility into action, that if they 'do
but find an instance in our Parliamentary history of a tempo-
rary infringement on the Navigation Laws, they insist upon it,
as a proof of their right to pursue a measure for their perma-
nent suspension, which is but another word for their total de-
struction. They find a case which has no resemblance in its
circumstances to the present, but no matter how dissimilar, it
is an instance iv which the Navigation Laws have been inter-
rupted in their course, and therefore they tell us, " we ought
to be allowed to pursue it as a precedent, because the Naviga-
tion Laws arc of a nature o odious, I suppose; that it is our in-
terest to have diem entirely destroyed." But it seems there is
a peat concern and compunction felt by the Governors of the
West India Islands, on account of the violation of their oaths,
in the instances wherein they are called upon to consent to the
suspension of the Navigation Laws ; that they are sworn to
preserve all the laws of the realm inviolate ; that a suspension
of' the laws is a violation of the laws ; and that a violation of
the laws is a vjolation of their oaths. Now, Sir, this may be
very laudable morality in the supporters of this Bill ; but I
cannot help observing, that this tenderness for the consciences
of the Governors of the West India Islands is a little whimsical,
considering how they were treated on former occasions. When
the Colonial Governors dispensed with the Navigation Law, in
cases of absolute necessity, and. Parliament never gave them
an indemnity for any 'ether, they were not told of this point of
conscience, if the Act is blameable. But how does the Right
Honourable Secretary of State treat them by the instructions
contained in his letter ? lie tells the Governors of the Islands
it is not necessity which I regard ; it is not your consciences I.
regard; I regard nothing but what appears to me to be conve-
nient ; and 1' will skew you; that what you thought was an ex-
cuse as a matter of necessity, shall be continued as a matter of
convenience ; and you shall suspend the law, however your
conscience may be affected by it, on account of the necessity of
doing it, not only during war, in which it may possibly be
thought necessary, but until six months shall have elapsed after
I shall have directed notice to be given of the discontinuance of
the practice. Now; what are the Governors to do all this time,
after the necessity, which alone is said to be the excuse, has
ceased? They are to continue in the uniform practice of the
violation of the law ; and thus, according to the argument of
Gentlemen on the other side, violate their-oaths in obedience to
the.order of the Secretary of State, And the Secretary Of State,
in the plenitude. of his power, grants to the Governors of the
islands an indulgence to commit that very sin, which the friends
of this Bill so much deplore ; and not only does he grant this
indulgence to commit sin, but lie gives them an encouragement,
nay, still more, lie commands them to commit sin; and yet these
are the Gentlemen who now turn up their eyes to Heaven, and
deprecate the evil of Governors being placed under the former
system, in a situation in which they were made, so immorally,
to tamper with their oaths.
Now, with regard to the question, " How far it is necessary to
lodge the power which this Bill gives any where," (which is not
proved,) I ani of opinion that, supposing it to be n ecessary to lodge
it any where, it would be better to lodise it with the Privy Coun-
cil than any where else. I have no difficulty in saying, that if
it must he given to an( body, I had much rather it were given
to the Privy Councila tan to the Governors of the-West India
Islands ; because I am of opinion, that the Privy Council
could, and would, exercise such a power more discreetly than
the Governors of the Islands could ; or perhaps I should say,
that the Privy Council would make a more discreet use of
their power than any other body of men would, supposing
them to be equal to others in information upon the facts on'
which their power was to operate. But I doubt the possibility
of their being able to possess that knowledge. which will be
requisite for the due discharge of the function with which this
Bill is to invest them ; for the question is not a question of dry,
abstract competency, in the Privy Council, to do justice to any
trust that may be. reposed in them : upon that none of us . can
entertain any doubt : but unless you place them in a situation
in .which the competency may come into action, that compea
tency can be of no use .to them, or to the public. I do nor
know whether they can do more than my Lord CaMden did,
whose instructions to the Governors of the Islands' have been
so often alluded to in the discussions which have taken place
on this subject tand here it is observable, that whatever power
you may give to the Privy Council, whatever responsibility
you may attach to the Privy Council ; however you may take
away the responsibility of the Governors ; however you may
affect to take away their discretion ; it is most manifest', that
they must act on their discretion, while -they have any Power
W act at all ; Its this. Bill will not -.alter • the necessity-- under
which they are to act. They nuist, after all the instructions
which you may give to them from hence, act according to their
discretion upon -the circumstances of the case,•as circumstances
may arise ; and you must indemnify them too, just, as yoit
did before this Bill was thought of ; and for the same reason
you always did it, because it is impossible to avoid it. This
has been verified by the fact ; for when power was in the hands
of the Privy Council,- to regulate the whole of the trade be-
tween America and th West India Colonies ; when it was in-
finitely important-that the Privy Council should exercise their
authority e'and 'When they did exercise their authority; and an
Act of Parliament passed for the purpose ; when the directions of
the Privy Council were sent to the Governors of the West Indies ;
when that power, so given to the Privy Council, and by them de-
legated, necessarily and unavoidably delegated; to the Governors
of the West India Islands; and that power so delegated was
abused by some of those Governors, still the power was not
taken away, but left with those same Governors, even although
it was abused by them— why ? Because Parliament knew it
was impossible to take it away. But now, instead of allowing
the Governors to act upon their own conviction, you are going
to order them what they are to do before hand, when- you may
not possess the information requisite for the purpose ; and when
after all your directions ere given, they must, in many cases,
at least, act upon their own discretion, even though it should
be contrary to the orders of the Privy Council I should say,
that even if this Bill were passed, and the Privy Council were
acting under its authority, _there might be circumstances in
which it was not less the duty of Parliament to institute an
inquiry on that account.; because, although the power may
have been granted by the Legislature, yet a question might
arise -upon the propriety of its continuance—and a question
might arise, whether the discretion should be left with the
Privy Council or with 'the Governors ?—Supposing, that the
Legislature did not take pains to make a proper inquiry in
the first instance, it does not follow= they should not make it in
the second. I have heard of such a thing as a possibility of
the Legislature having conducted itself =properly ; but if,
after having done .to, ,we were .to say that the thing should

never be altered, because of the reverence we all ought to have
for the Legislature, that would be equivalent to saying, that
-if the Legislature has once conduculd itself imprudently, it
Must conduct itself imprudently to the end of time. Now let
us. suppose, instead of this being a bill about to be passed into
alaw, it had been a law • that instead of our having to con-
sider whether we shall make this law, we were considering a
law already made ; and the greatness of the shipping interest
of this country were to come forward, and to complain to Par-
' liament of the destructive effect of the Act of Parliament,
would you refuse to hear the complaint ? Would you think,it
-a fair, or even a Sensible answer to say, " We have followed
the pre tice prescribed by this Act now for 13 years—you tell
us that you are competent to the ample supply of the West
India Colohies—you tell us, that the great interest of the em-
pire requifres that you should have the exclusive right of fur-
nishing these supplies ; that the navigation requires it ; that
without it the country will decay in strength, and dwindle into
weakness, and finally be ruined." Would you, I say, think
it a semfibleanswer to say, G°lnasmuch as we have done this
for 13 ybart, we will go on ?" Do you conceive that these con-
secutive acts would he an excuse for their own continuance,
and release you from the duty of entering into an inquiry on
the subject when these matters are stated to you ? Is it too
much to say, that you ought to inquire whether, and to see
whether, the public interest does, or does not, really demand
a change of such a system ?—I apprehend, Sir, that in such a
case, even if we had an Act of Parliament under which we
had thus acted for thirteen years, it would be the duty of Par-
liament to institute the proposed inquiry ; and if so, how much
more is it the duty of this House to institute an inquiry into
the propriety of a mere practice, which is not a law, before you
sanction the practice by law—and that is all which the shipping
interest ask of you. They do not desire you to say that this
measure is not necessary, or that it ought not, under any cir-
cumstances, to be adopted ; they only desire you not to adopt
it without ascertaining that it is necessary. Upon this prac-
tice the Noble Lord's argument is, that Parliament ought to
declare, immediately, that the power cannot-but be necessary
in time of war. I am afraid it would turn out, upon in-
quiry, to he necessary-to do something of this description
in time of war ; but of this I am quite sure, Parliament
ought not to deliver that opinion without hearing those who
rue of another. lam not callitng on you to say that this prat=
tice of thirteen years, on which you rely so much, is not neces-
sary to be continued; I am not saying that it is not absoltitely
necessary that an intercourse should-subsist between our West
India Colonies and America, and that that intercourse should
take place through the medium of American shipping; but I
am saying, that I do really think it is extremely important to
ascertain whether it is necessary or not;' and supposing it was
totally unnecessary, I have no more wish than the Noble Lord
has, to say any thing that may savour of an illiberal' spirit with
regard to America. Far be it from me to say any thing by
which any commercial jealousies should prevent you from en-
joying those advantages which may arise from good amity with
America, and that you should not relax, for your own conve-
nience, your own laws. Let America profit as much as she
may, by any system which we adopt, while that system is ser-
viceable to ourselves ; or, still more, let America profit as
much as she may by our adopting that which our own interest
requires. But while I say this, I cannot shut my eyes to the
principle on which America proceeds in a sort of discussion,
by which she appears not to rely on the force of reason, neither
does she refer to the last resort of nations to enforce their will—
the thunder of the cannon. But she says, " that she can make
a commercial war upon you." It is one of the propositions
which are most current in America—" that, by shutting up
her ports, and by denying her produce to our Colonies in the
Virett Indies, she can reduce Great Britain to her own terms."—
That is the favourite topic in America. Why, then, I would,
say, that I would not put myself more in her power; I would
not become more dependent on her than I could. help. Now,
every body must admit that this Bill, and especially the argu-
ments by which it is supported, make us very dependent upon
her ; because they both proceed on the probability that we are
in her power with respect to the very existence of our West
India Colonies ; and if you proceed on a recognition of that
principle, every day your inability will increase; because, in
proportion as America gets hold of this trade, in the same pro-
portion exactly your North- American Colonies are excluded
front it. For it is quite impossible for your North American
Colonies to come in competition with America in trading to the
West India Colonies. You are informed, by papers on your
table, that the ability of your North American Colonies will
decrease, day after day, and that of America will increase in
exact proportion to it; and therefore you see, in this partieular,
as your power is decreasing in our North American Colonies,
your dependence on America is becoming greater. But satisfy
yourselves first of the existence of the necessity ; and do not
let us, by argument and presumption, without proof, put our-
selves under America, and at her mercy, and in the state in
which we are to be told, as in the year 1734, that we could not
do without America. It may be said, and we are to argue'
upon it, that this measure is not to touch any negotiation upon
which public rumours are on foot, but we must act as if there
had been no such thing; I say, that if you go on with this
trade, the British colonial system will come to an end alto-
gether ; you will be disabled from carrying it on, because in
time the whole of the British shipping will have vanished; for,
in time of peace even, ships cannot be restored. In the first
place, it will take a course of years to bring you into the situa-
tion in which you were; for that reason you should enter into
an inquiry, that you may ascertain what you now have left,
and what you are in possession of; for, under this system,
every hour your situation grows worse, and more and more
difficult. This is not like the operation which the war has
upon your seamen ; for when the war terminates, by the pro-
vision of the Navigation Acts, you have your seamen
,again
provided you have your shipping, all is well, your trade will
go on. For,
,under the Navigation Acts, you permit only a
given proportion of fOreign.seamen to navigate your ships, even
in time of war ; and so, -when the war ceases, there your ships
are, and you have your men to navigate them. You do not, in
any case, even in time of war, permit your ships to be entirely
manned by foreigners ; you being, by your Navigation Laws,
bound to continue arid 'keep up the proportion of British sea-
men on board them. But what will you say to the operation
of the system of this Bill, which tends to annihilate the British
shipping ? for, under this system, every ship that is used up
is so much dead loss, which can never be repaired ; as not
another will be built to supply it. What motive can there be
to do when there is no employment for it ? is like living
on your capital, instead of subsisting upon the produce of it;
for there can be no fresh produce to supply the deficiency as it
,arises ; you render it impossible to renew your shipping. Nor
is this all. Although this is enough to bring on your inevitable
ruin, should the war continue, yet it works more rapidly to-
wards your destruction in another way ; for not only does it
prevent your seamen from being reared up, by taking away the
source of their future employment, but it creates an immediate
drain upon those you have already ; because, by enlarging the
scope of the American' shipping trade, you enlarge her demand
for seamen ; and by this system America is already so over-
grown in the shipping trade, that her own seamen, fast as she
is rearing them, are by no means equal to her wants ; and the
natural effect of that is, that she will take away yours ; and the
truth of this the Hon. Baronet (Sir W. Young), who spoke
from under the gallery in support of this measure, admits he
has told you, in as many words, that a.great many British sea-
men are daily brought up by America in open markets, so that
you are not to suppose that the evils of this system will cease
with the war. Therefore, arguing this Bill upon the suppo-
sition of the Noble Lord, that it only is ,to reserve to the
Privy Council the power which has hitherto been given to
the Governors of the 'West 'lndia Islands ; I say, since the
effects of it are stuli as I have stated, you ought not even
to do that without inquiry. -But, when we come to look
at the true -description- of thi, Measure; it is 'utterlyimPos-
sible that -a British Parliament can be any party to it in its
present state. Can a British Parliartient be reconciled to
this Act, the *suit of which is, to take away all the
British shipping, and with it all the British seamen, for
the one follows the other, and both are absolutely inevitable,
supposing the war to be of long continuance ? I should like to
hear any man argue this ;point. I was very anxious to hear
what the Noble Lord had to say upon this part of the subject;
and, says the Noble Lord, the Americans are not blind enough
not to know that your colonial system is an artificial system, an
artificial and a constrained system.—(No, no, no ! from Lord
Henry Petty.)—l should be very happy to be satisfied that I
have mistaken the meaning of the Noble Lord, but I certain-
ly did understand him tb say, that the Americans well knew
our colonial system to be an artificial and constrained system.
It would be very gratifying, undoubtedly, to me to suppose,
Or rather to be satisfied, that the Noble Lord's meaning, as
contreyed, or intended to be conveyed by his words, did not
give any degree of countenance to the provisions of this Bill,
aslfiar as it has the effect of promoting that impression; and I
should be glad if the forms of' debate could afford to me the sa-
tisfaction of hearing the Noble Lord at once disavow that senti-
ment. But that I must be content to wait for in its turn, ac-
cording to the rules which, for general convenience, are made
to govern our debates. If the Noble Lord did mean that, or
any thing like it, -then I say we must be content to surrender
the whole of our navigation-laws, and do a great deal more than
this Bill professes to do ; for, after this Bill passes, the West
India Colonies are no more ours than they are the Colonies of
North America,—l will venture to say not ohe half so much,
except that of the burthen of them all the profits of them will
go to America, and the burthens and disadvantages of them
will alone remain to us. For there are disadvantages, and very
great disadvantages, in all cases, to a mother country from her
Colonies, and those belong to. ours in the West Indies. It is
always a question of balance between the advantages and disad-
vantages of a Colony, on which tlepends the policy whether you
part from it or retain it ; for we are obliged to defend it in time
of war, and we are under the necessity of affording a great and

expensive force for that purpose : nay, in some cases, we are
obliged, not only to carry on, bait to commence war, on ac-
count of our Colonies ; and it is ,historically correct that many
of our wars have been onaheir account.—Many of our wars, I
say, are of that description : Nor is this the only inconvenience
we stiffer on account of our Colonies; for it has been a princi-
ple_ of our policy to impose restraint on ourselves, for the pur-
pose of giving our Colonies an advantage in our markets over
the produce of other countries ;—and we have often been obli-
ged, indeed we are in the daily habit of obliging our own peo-
ple, to pay dearer for the articles of our Colonies than we can
buy them for of other countries. Why ? Because we have ad-F
vantages from thein which we cannot claim from those coun-
tries who are not dependent upon us ; and the advantages, up-
on a view of all the circumstances, are '()Teeter than the disad-
vantages. But what does this Bill do ? It proposes to give up
all the trade, and all the benefit of the Colonies, to America ;
and that we shall keep the expences and the burthen of them.
I will ask his Majesty's Ministers, whether, after the passing
of this Bill, there will be any security that one ounce of Colo-
nial produce will ever again come into Great Britain ? - Sup-
pose the Americans, who, by this Bill, are empowered to carry
your Colonial produce where they please, should choose to car-
ry your Colonial produce to all the markets of Europe, (for
that, most undoubtedly, they may do, under the provisions of
this Bill,) not one hogshead of the sugar of your Colonies
would come into this country. You may thus lose, at Once,. all
the advantages, while you retain all the inconveniencesl. of our
Colonial system.—You are obliged to burthen your people with
very heavy duties, for the purpose of supporting this Colonial
produce ; and you are now giving tip the advantages of that
produce to America,—you are now giving to America more
than if you were about to enter into a treaty to cede to her the.
whole of your Colonies for ever; for, in that case, you would
say to her, since you must have the Colonies to yourselves, you
`must take the burthen of them as .well as the advantages; but,
'instead of that, we give to -America the choice, at least, of
taking all the advantages, without their being liable to one of
the burthens, of the West India Colonies.
But the IlOn. Baronet (Sir W. Young) was pleased to state,
that it was wise to repeal your navigation laws in part, for the
sake of restoring your commerce. I will not argue the general
proposition of what is of a superior, or what of a subordinate
or secondary. nature, —whether commerce is not essential to the
suppprt of the nation, and, consequently, to our naval strength,
—and, whether, without commerce, ve could support the state,
or could have a navy. These are general propositions, which,
as I have said already, I have no inclination to dispute ; for I
always distrust them in argument, because 1 am never sure
that they apply to the case in discussion.
The general proposition of the Honourable Baronet therefore,
that theFprotection of trade is essential to the welfare of the
empire, Ido not dispute ; but the qtiestion is this—is the Bill
now before us of that description which will tend to the pro-
tection of trade in the manner which the Honourable Baronet
supposes ? Of ,what use is it that we should hear stated and
established these general propositions,which are true in all cases,
unless the measure now before us falls within their policy ? I
may, on the other hand, with as much truth say, and -insist
upon it, as a counter-proposition, that just- in proportion
as you surrender your navigation, you surrender your
commerce. • But the question is, whether the case, as it
arises out of this Bill, comes under the one or the other
of these propositions. I alledge it does : I do say that,
by this Bill, you lay the foundation of the ruin of your
trade, by the surrender of your navigation to a degree that is
absolutely extravagant, besides being a total surrender of the
power of Parliament to revise what may be done under it, such
as hitherto hai been the habit from year to year. See what the
necessity Which Ministers contend to be the "foundation of
this Bill will lead them to, and does lead them to—that of
surrendering the navigation of this country, so as to put the
American shipping on a footing with the British. That would
be a pretty strong thing for a British Parliament to consent to ;
btu this is much stronger, for here you relax your navigation
laws, in favour of American shipping, to a degree to which it
never was relaxed in favour of British shipping.. Sir, Ido not
know that the framers of this Bill know it, but it most unques- •
tionably is the fact, that the trade to be carried on with the Co.
. . .

lonies in British shipping is confined to certain specified ar-
ticles; whereas to the American shipping it is unconfined and
unlimited. For, when once the American • ships are got into
your Colonies, they may take the produce of these Colonies
WHITHEIISOEVER THEY PLEASE, ALL OVER THE WORLD,.
and they are npt restricted so much even as the British shipping
is. ,Good GoD ! what a spectacle is this to exhibit to the world !
am I in a British Parliament beseeching and imploring it not
to pass a Bill which has for its object such enormous effects as
that of taking off restrictions upon a trade to be carried on with
British Colonies by foreigners, which are continued with re-
gard to British subjects! Why, Sir, this willingness to erase
out of the statute-book the very name of your navigation-law,
is a disposition, GUIDING THE COUNCILS AND CHANGING
THE ANCIENT POLICY OF GREAT Paturaix—it is, a change,
indeed, which the French Statesman himself would enjoy. He
could have wished no other ; he had no other desire, as he has
often expressed, although our commercial law affected France
less than any other maritime power in Europe ; for they never
were our rivals in the carrying trade, and, yet, they called our
Navigation Laws an odious hostile eode, by which England
made war on the industry of all Nations.
[Here the Right Honourable Gentleman added anotherde-
scription of the Law Of Navigation, from the same French Au-
thor,* which I could not hear.]
What a triumph to our enemies must it be, if the Parliament
of Great Britain agree to give up these laws, which their ene-
mies have so long regarded as their bane, while they are the
foundation of our greatness.
.But, then, it may be said, that although the powers given by
this Bill are so enormous, still you will not impute to the Privy.
Council any intention to use such powers to the ruin of their
country ; and it is as well for the Privy Council to adopt mea-
sures for the general advantage of our trade and navigation as
for Parliament to do so; and it cannot be supposed that these
powers will be used by the Privy Council for any other purpose
than that of the interest of their country, however enormous
these powers may appear to you to be. Why, Sir, if these are
powers unfit to be used, as most certainly they are, they are un-
fit to be asked for • and if asked for, they are unfit to be grant-
ed. And, certainly, in the very extensive sense in which power
is here claimed, it is impossible it can be executed; and why
should any set of men have a power by Act of Parliament to
ruin their country ? Is it to be considered as a ground on which
concessions may be made by us ? Is it because Ministers must
be supported ? and that it is not to be supposed Miniters
would use the power in the latitude with which it is given, in
order that Parliament may shew that there is no bound to the
liberality of its concession ? There certainly may be in some
cases a great difficulty, in others an impossibility, to define pre-
cisely or exactly what is necessary to be given by way of dis-
cretionary power to Ministers, or to express specifically what
power should be withheld from them ; and, therefore, a general
and undefined power must be given, and we must trust to the
discretion of Ministers in the use of it ; such was the case when
the Habeas Corpus Act was suspended. At the time when that
measure took place, the country was put to the disagreeable ne-
cessity of defending itself in that mode
~,gainst a few conspira-
tors, and put for that purpose the li'oeities of all the subjects of
this realm under the care of the Executive. Government of the
Country : you could not accomplish your object in any other
way. For, although you had every reason to be assured that
the conspirators- were but few in number ; 'yet you • could not
draw a distinction between them and the rest of the King's sub-
jects until after they were tried ; and, therefore, from the ne-
cessity of the case, you were obliged to make the poWer general,
leaving the exercise of it to his Majesty's Ministers, and they
were to detain only those against whom there were founded sus-
picions. But this general power is never necessary to be given,
when the thing to be done can be specified ; so here, in the ar-
ticles to be carried away by neutral ships from your Colonies,,
what is to hinder you from specifying rum and molasses ? par-
ticularly after what has been said by an Honourable Baronet,
by which itappears that there has been a specification and an
enumeration of all the articles allowed to be taken away from
the Colonies in neutral ships? if 50,,, specification and enume-
ration are possible; therefore there can be no necessity for these
unqualified and sweeping powers.

Sir, when I am called upon to,agtee to the giving of power
to others, which power may be exercised discreetly, perhaps,
bat very differently from that which I expect at •the time of
granting it, a question necessarily arises in my mind, what is
thought upon that subject by those who demand the power, and
by whom it is to be exercised ? Hoiv do I know what power
Ministers think necessary to exercise, except the power which
they claim ? [lave lony other criterion to go by ? And that
is a power which no man will say can be tolerated, if exercised
to its full extent.: In the hands of one man this power may be
an absolute nullity ; for he would use no part of it, and, there-
fore, it is useless to give it ; in the hands of another it may be
executed to a ruinous extent ; and, for that reason, dangerous
to give it, and, therefore, under this artificial and constrained
system, (for I cannot help retaining the use of these words) it is
impossible to go on, and therefore much better to give it
up. How do I knoss% that the idea of the use to which
any of the powers to be given by this Bill, is that
which they would wish to make of it ? I own Ido
not know what they mean by this Bill ; and, as I have said
already, it would be an affront to them to suppose that they
have no meaning, which is' of itself, a reason why I should
not assent to this Bill. Sir, I see no bounds whatever to the
power which the Privy Council is to have to give an unlimited
indulgence to American shipping ; an I see nothing whatever.,
in this Bill which gives to the Privy Council any authority to
make the slightest regulation with reference 'to British ship;
ping, so that the indulgen,ce is all to the Ainericad, and the

• Hauterive,

rigoutis all to thei:Pritish shipping.—[Here he read a clause
in the Bill to prove tiis observation.]
Sir,' is it not monstous that such a provision should exist, in
any shape whatever, in a British Act of Parliament, and, yet,
here it is; a power :o grant, in favour of American shipping,
that which cannot lit granted to British shipping; is it possible
that such power can be given by a Mush Parliament ? Sir,
I really have no ides that Ministers are aware of the meaning
of it.

These, Sir, are the reasons I have to show that this Bill
ought not to pass into a law. I have shewn the danger of as-
senting to any measure of this kind without inquiry ; I have
shewn that it is different from any measure that ever was yet
adopted in Parliament ; I have shewn that no situation in
which this country can be placed can ever require such powers
to be given to any body of men in it ; I have shewn the into-
lerable insult which it offers to the British shipping by placing
it below that of a foreign state ; I have shewn the ruin which
will attend an attempt to put in force any 'thing like the extent
of its provision. Is it then, after all this, is it too much to ask
of a British House of Parliament, not to destroy the best in-
terests of the British empire by destroying its navigation, and
that without the regularity of an inquiry ? If you thought
the thing. was One worth,!you ought to observe more decorum
in the detruction of it. Ii- gentlemen will contend it is im-
probable the Privy Council will exercise, improperly, the power
to be given them by this Bill, I answer that the prospect is not
flattering in that particular, by . the disregard and contempt
which you have shewn for the law already ; when you your-
selves will -mot venture to define the use.- which you intend to
make of the power when you have obtained it, and when •you
shew that you regard your colonial system as an artificial and
constrained system ;
.so that, after this, there may be a total
abandonment of the old system of the Niivigatioh Laws.
if ever there. was a time in which it was the duty of Parliament
to guard against the introduction of theseaiestruetive principles,
by which the Navigation Laws are threatened with annihila-
tion, and more particularly against giving any persons in the
State the power Of producing that effect, the present moment
is that very time; and I think that the necessity of caution is
considerablyinereased by the very arguments which have been
urged in support of this Bill to-night. Good God! Sir, what
has been the ground on which this Bill has been defended ?
Ministers are determined, it seems, to carry every thing by
storm; for they do not reason on the wisdom or the policy of
the Bill, but they recommend it to this. British licaise-Of Par-
liament,- by shriving that it is of the same kind as other acts of
hostility which haVe, at different ttnies, and under different
circumstances, been committed against the Navigation Laws
of Gr6-at Britain ; so that the recommendation to the Bill is, its
msemblance to those measures wbieh are hostile to the Navi-
gation Laws ! I say, that if this Bill should pass into a law, a
foundation will have been laid, by which Ministers may come
to Parliament with. any claim which . the intoxication of suc-
cessful power may dictate or suggest. They may think it
ne-
cessary to relinquish the Whole system, of 'our naval strength ;
there is nothing which may not be justihed Under this ;
and, if any body should attempt to resist the extravagance of
the application, they have nothing to do but to hold up this
Bill and say, "See here, the powers which the Legislature has
confided in us.; we must have this measure ; it is essential to
the system which Parliament has delegated to us in its_wis.
dom, to which I know not what answer any one could make."
Sir, I had much more to add, but after having trespassed en
the patience of the House so long, I must pass it over. I can
only express a confident hope that Parliament (a British Par-
liament) will not hold out such a spectacle to the world as the
recognition of such a principle as this Bill contains would be :
which would be Only doing that by a law of your own which
your enemies, aiming at your destrttctioa, have hitherto endea-
voured in vain to accomplish ; who have, for upwards of a
.century, been endeavouring to impress upon the world a con-
viction that your Navigation Laws are at war with the rights,
and hostile to the interests of other countries, I trust that you
will not do for your enemies that which they have never been
able to accomplish for themselves : I trust that aiu will not
deliver up to Ministers the whole foundation ofd your great-
ness; I -trust you will not think that you:will triumph by teach-
: ing foreign powers to say the policy of Great Britain is changed ;
they have given up the system of their Navigation Laws,- by
an Act .orParliament, into the hands of the Ministers, who
now' see it will not do-for them any longer:to maintain. that op-
pressivepreponderatice by which they were the masters of the
ocean; they have given up that system,-and gradually it will
be suffered to die away under the wisdom of a truly enlight-
ened Administration, who will not suffer that terror and death
to the hopes of other- nations at sea, the Navigation Law, to
stand in the way of those great, philosophically pacific arrange-
ments which they have formed.
Sir, I trust that a British Parliament will never enable
the enemies of Great Britain to hold out such language to
the world : I trust that a British Parliament will not give
up that guardian power it possesses over the interests of the
British empire, by passing a Bill which contains provisions
that no man has yet been bold enough to say he would infaree
to their full extent ; I trust you will not gave up that system
by which you have grown up into your present power ; a sys-
tem on the preservation of which it is my entire conviction that
not only your prosperity, but your very existence, entirely de,
pends.

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, SATURDAY, lifanca 9.

To-day their Lordships met about a quarter
to four, when it was anticipated that certain Bills,
including the Circuits • Commissions Bill, would
be received from the Commons, but it now ap-
peared that they had not been passed, by the
other House, to the requisite stage. The Attor-
neys and Solicitors Regulation Act Amendment
Bill passed through a Committee, and was re-
ported without any amendment to the House.—
Adjourned to Monday.

The plan for reducing the NATIONAL DEBT,
alluded to by Mr. WILLIAM WILLIAMS, in the
House of Commons, on Friday night, was sent
round to the Members of Parliament by Mr.
JOHN BRICKWOOD, formerly a banker in Lom-
bard-street. The plan which he proposes is
simply a conversion of the present public funds
into a new 5 per cent. stock of a higher denomi-
nation. It is ascertained to be perfectly prac-
ticable. It is also perfectly consistent with
public faith. Indeed it is, all circumstances
considered, for the interest of the Stockholder;
because it will give his annuity a greater com-
mand over the necessaries of life ; it will increase
the annuity of the present three per cents., and
not so much reduce that of the 'four and five per
cents. as it is intended by the CHANCELLOR of
the EXCHEQUER to reduce them next year. And
although the annuity of the 3 per cents. will be
augmented, the reduction of the interest of the
5 and fl perxents., which, according to law, are
liable to reduction, will, upon the whole amount
of the present dividends on 3,4, and 5 per cents
taken together, effect a great saving to "the State.
While the total 'mount of the national debt will
be reduced, probably two hundred millions,
without either violating public faith, or sup-
posing that the whole of the 3 per cent. holders
would consent to the conversion. Making there-
fore ample provision for leaving a sufficiency of
3 per cents. for the Traders in Stock in the Stock
market. The plan is deemed a most valuable
discovery in Finance. Its simplicity, its practi.
cability, and the importance of its results, esta-
blish, in a peculiar manner, its claims to the im-
mediate attention of Members of Parliament ;
especially at a time of acknowledged difficulty
among public men to devise the certain means of
restoring prosi)erity and happiness to the com-
munity.

The High Sheriff of Shropshire has, in answer
to two requisitions for convening a county meet-
ing to petition Parliament on the subject of agri-
cultural distress, returned a positive refusal.
A Requisition is now signing, to convene a
meeting of the Livery of London, to' consider
the present distress of the country, and to peti-
tion for a reduction of the present burdens of
taxation, and a Reform in Parliament.