The Sun.
London, England, 1815-04-25 00:00:00

iMPEriTAL PARLIAMENT.

noust OF LORDS, Mo!quay, ApalL 24.
rri the Si;otch Appeal, the ConiolisSionert isx the Caledonian
Canal C. Grant, Mr: Grant was heard: for the appellant, Sir
S. Ruudlly aud HOrtier fur ths: respondent, and Mr.
Leach for the appellant in rerly.---;-Jiiktuent iras pOstponad
lA, Wednesday.
The further conkideratitin of the Borthtvick Peerage wac •
deferred from to-inurrow (for which slay it Stodd) until Thurs-
day.

•inisel was partly heard the Writ of Error CaSe, SirJ,
st...'tohytt v. the Atturtiey-General of the Prince of Wales.—
Further ptiieeedlugs ,Weiliteitlify; •
.The Batik Restriction Bill AIId the Irisli,Treatifry Bills Bill
Weil: brought up froth the Hoyle Coalitions, iota read a
first time..
The Witieridnients made by the House of Commons in the
Scotch Trial by Jo.y Bill were taken into ciOisnlcration, anti
agreed to, With seveial alterations proposed by the Lord
Chancellor.

Lord REDESOALE, iiApluli-sEttAalEleSeof his notice* Md that
it should be a staritlitig-Order of their LordsnipS thatove
Appeals
frmn the three several parts of the United Kingdum should
taken- in regular sueeeSsion,—lirst one from .4leutiand then
one from Ireland, :did lastly one from Enipand. Ordered' to
be taken into consideration that day se'nnight.
The Earl of LAUDEttPALE, order to enable their
Lordships to form a better judgment of the proposed change
of arrangement MI this subject, moved fur a statement of all
the Appeals that had been brooght before them, distingulAi-
ing the Scoteh, the Irish, and the. English.
The i,altD CLIANC4CLOR suggested. limiting tltt retrospec•
tire effect of the motion to too )'ears.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE arced to limit it to thre4
years, and for that period the motion was a,verd to.
TREATY OF ViENNA:
The Earl of STANHOiIi wished to ask the Noble
Earl opposite two questions. He. had scaicely
ever feit more concern than since their Lordships'
• last meeting, having read iii the public prints *
paper purporting to be a Treaty signeu by the
tour great Allied Powers at Vienna on the 25th of
arch. 'The first question he would ask the Noble
Lord was, if he would -object to produee this
Treaty 1_ If so,-be thought their Lordships should
insist on its production. 'There was a clause in
the Trcuty which he had heard was not correctly
published. Ile believed it was not, for if such 4
clause was ready in the Treaty, it was not a Treaty
for tanking win-, but for introducing a system of
universal massacre. _ nicant the clause by
which the Allied Powers bound themselves to
bring to, justice all those individuals tilio took
part teit: the person who was at present the Ruler
of France. . He wished to ask the Noble Earl if
there really was any such clause in the 'Treaty ?
If not, be considered it essential tothe bottom' of
the country thlit the negative should be kniiirns
The clause was exceptionable, not, only in point
of justice, humanity, and expediency, but also
point of law.—He denied the right of kings, or
the representatives of kings, to make such tl
Treaty with such a clause in it. Jt totally al,
tered the situation of the Army and Navy, and
all Oilicers employed in both services. When
they en; ailed themselves, it was to meet the
eneutylairly, and chic in the field of honour,
but..not to be
,exposed to the fate of being
murdered by being hanged in cold blood, He
objected to the clause in point of law on ano-
ther ground.• One of the most wise and most
humane of our statute's was that of the 1 lth of
Henry 7, by which it was enacted, that it wari
not only not high treason but not even criminal
to adhere to any King de facto, whether he was
King de jure or- not. He, therefore, on this denied our right to agree to such a clause. •
His third objection to the clause on the ground of
its being illegal ,wits that it any Commander in.
Chief, Civil Authority, King, or Emperor,. were
to put to death tr. person tor supporting the cause
Of an existing Sovereign, such act would, by the
law of England, be deemed Murder; and Jig.'
therefore denied the right of the Executive
Go-
vernment to make a Treaty comprehending such
a clause. ,another objection to it was, that it
was contrary to the rules of war recognised among
civilized nations. Arid his fifth and lUst reason
against the clause was, that it was illegal, ,be-
cicll a.uoieseet
the
ttehxacc'
tal
clause
cseoe n,Nt
010- r raet
Elteodarsittiette,iolaultaktl.ovcr 'otonhfseeGini
honour. rut!
00.
"priir
00 e
t.
r
the country lie wotild inform their Lordships
whether it did or did not contain such a clause art,
he had described.

The Earl of LIVERPOOL replied, that he had no
difficulty in stating to the Noble Earl that aTreaty
had been signed at Vienna on the 25th March, by
the four great Allied rowers.—fur had he any
.difficulty in stating, that the copy which had been
published' in the Newspapers was not correct, anti
on that. point particularly to which -the NoAe Earl
had adverted; there were no words in the real

Treaty such as the Noble Earl had described, or
which would bear a similar interpretation. Theig
Lordships were aware that it was not usual for the
Executive Government to lay before Parliament
Any Treaty which had not been ratified. When
this Treaty should be ratified, it would be his

tity, or that of some of his Noble Colleagues, to
receive his Royal Highness the Prince Regent's
coniinands to lay it on the Table of the House.—
lf, however, the Noble Earl chose to move for

the substance of the. Treaty be would not object to
its production.
STANHOPE observed, that a motion for
a copy of the Treaty had been acceded to in the
other House, and he hoped the Noble Earl would

trot be stiffer than his Noble Colleague.' He would,
therefore, wove for a, Copy of the Treaty
The Earl of LIVERPOOL. repeated that a copy of
the Treaty could not be laid on the Table of the
House until its ratification. He begged the Noble
Earl would confine himself to moylug for tbe.sub-

stance of ii, which tot his purpose would be pre-
..
cisely the same thing.
Earl STANHOPE exclaimed that he did not care
whether it was copy or snbstauce, provided it was
correct.

An Address, therefore, to his Royal Highness
the Prince'Regent, praying, for the substance of
the Treaty was agreed to. •
The Marquis of „L'ANADowNn, adverting to the-
important discussion which stood for to-inorrow,:,
pstpolled the tc nond reading of the, Bill for 5e...?.
curing the liberty of the subject fro t40i(14
mail #londay..—Adj m
ourned. , .
, . .------"IL'--7 •
•
HOM OF cONIM'. ONs,
'Mr. pUGDALE presented a Petition froru 13frnaingliaot
pg:tiost the Insolvent Debtors' Aat. Ordered to he on the ~
table. -- ' i.
Mr. I-TARRIS brought to the Bar an account of the duriel ~
on coals arid cinders brought to the port of London during tire.
year 1913. Ordered to lie on the table. ,
Mr: ItOBIN.SON nauved for leave to brin; in 41344 ina.ko

~'tii

I

I

4

,' i

(':s

11

I 1
i ;
'

1

:~

N
tk i`ei 6 Tr* •iieg,-ter in tire ottn-ern lb"
time of t heir bring tit'ken ar-1 ttrei-iont"im aujuclitation. L::.tre
-grottytt. . , • . !
Mr. 8P.111.A.M inoi.ed 'tor teave.to ing in 8 13,11 for better
'sec n, of Lands aml,tenements under the try-
c!, r:quity. larary given. . -
On the rnOtiwt of ..Sir J. !iiita.W, the; Past Office Bill wAt
'Ordered to be t-cad a second time on Wednesday se'nnight.

•
Tnt:,vric
Ir W Fris KAp moved for tile 5 bSt of any`
rttalv or Lo4.,,agement entered into atTiepoa, he-
t Ateli this Ouni ry aim terrain other powers, 01001 e
25ti, March hist, with the substance of any
Dote of explanation of any articles in that Treaty,
or of any Declaration issued for that purpose by
his Majesty's Government, to the parties to the
r.eaty ot:Vienta, explanatory of the views of his
ll:ljesty's :Government, with the date of the re-
ceipt of said Treaty itt this country, and the par-
ticulars of the subsidiary arr4ngenients connected
,thereivith,

Lord t.AsTLERFAGH had ,no objection to accede
to the motion, nay he protested against this be-
ing drawn into a .precedent as a proof of the con-:
troul pos.ttesed by the House over the prerogative
of the Crown with respect to war or peace.
After it 'few' words trout, Mr. WHITBREAD,. Mr.
TIERNEY, and Lore CATLEREAGII, the, motion
Was agreed.