The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-20 00:00:00

THE. SUN, LONDON,

which he did in 1837, when he said that the time had come when
something ought to be dene to settle the question. There ap-
pea ed. therefore. the strongest probability of ;he correctness
of what he ( Lord G. Bentinck ) had stated in reference to the
opposition of the Right Honourable Baronet to the Catholic
&aims in 182.1.—( Hear. hear.) In supped of what he
hail stated, he would refer to %chat took teace
in 1831. when the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for
Edinburgh (Mr Macaulay) spoke in favour of the Reform
BM, and alluded to the conduct of the Right Hon. Baronet,
The Right Hon. Baronet then went into a statement of his con-
duet in 1823. He said he had left in 1828 on account of his
views on the Roman Catholic question, but that the time had
rof a-rived when he could explain the circumstances that
led to it. But he might state that his opinions on
the question of the Catholic: laims remained unchanged,
but he thought that there would be danger to the ceuntry, and
the stability of ice institutions in further resisting the measure.
His opinions were unchanged, but he had doubts of resisting
the measure fir fear that greater evils might arise.--( Hear,
hear.) Hit opinions were the same as they had ever been, even
at the time when be asked Parliament to consent to the pass-
ing of the measure of Catholic Emancipation. The Hon.
Mernoer then read at considerable length a letter written by
the Right Hon. Baronet to his Grace the Duke of Wellington,
in which he urged upon his Grace the necessity oiasneedy settle-
ment of the long agitated question of Catholic Emancipation.
hut that he (Sir R. Peel) considered that it would affect his
character as a public man if after his expression of opinion on
the subject on a former occasion, he should undertake the con-
ducting of the Bill in the House of Commons. The Right
Hon. Baronet had written a letter to the Earl of Liverpool,
which he also read to the House, in which he stated that if the
Noble E,arl considered it would promote the success of the Bill,
he would resign and support it, regardless of any effect which
such a course might have upon his character as a public man.
The Noble Lord ( George Bentinck ) proceeded te ask, were
the memories of Hon. Gentlemen so fickle that they had for-
gitten that 'n the autumn of 182 e the Right Hon. Beronet
made a triumphant progress through the country as the
apostle of Protestant ascendency? Had Hon. Gentlemen forgot,
had the country forgot, would they ever forget, that he acted as
he had previously acted in .1827 towards Viscount Canning,
when he had the assurance to go down to Manchester, and
dined at a large public dinner as the champion of Protestant
ascendancy ?—(Cheeek ) When the Right Honourable Baronet
talks of the probity of his conduct, how could Hon. Members
of that House answer for the probity of the conduct of a Gen-
tleman who stood there convicted of having gone through all
the manufacturing districts, dining there at great public dinners
as the Protestant champion, after he hail in the summer of that
year made up his mind to carry Catholic emancipation. He
wanted to know whether a snuff-box would have been pre-
sented to him from Liverpool—from Mr. Hollingshead. he be

lieved —whether he would have received these assemblies--
would have been feted and honoured with all these dinners
by the Protestants and Orangenaen of the country, if they had
anticipated that in the summer of 1828 he had made up his
mind to carry Catholic emancipation ? There was then au end
of the Right Honourable Baronet's defence.—(Cries of " Oh,
oh.") Hon. Gentlemen might cry " Oh, ob," but did they
rember the pledges they had given to their constituents ; would
their constituents cry " Oh, oh ?"—( Cheers. 1 He would now
go back to the speech of Sir Seward Knatchbull. The
Right Hon. Baronet had said Sir Edward Knatchbull could
not have been present when he made his speech, or
he would not have addressed the House in the tone and
manner he did. But did the Right Hon. Baronet get up at the
time to complain pith's, er to make any explanation ?—( Cheers.)
But the Right Hon. Gentleman never touched that part of
the speech in which Sir E Knatchbull imputed to him that con-
duct towards Mr. Canning. He has never answered that
charge--it never can be answered. Sir E. Knatchbull said,
that if his opinions had been changed. he ought, in justice to
himself, in justice to his friends, in justice to Mr. Canning,
who was the ab!e and constant advocate of the measure,
to heve conceded it. If, as he says now, that he considered
in 1825 the quest on ought to have been conceded, why did he
not think so in 1627, when the supposed difference with Mr.
Canning upon this point obtained for him the must powerful
supeert, which I confess. said Sir E. Knatchbull, " to have
been the case with me; and if we are to be secured by our con.
cessions to Catholics, from their gratitude, why not, concede
the measure through the hands of those who have been its con-
stant advocates, and who would have looked upon it as a boon
coming from them, but wh3 could not view it in such a light
coming from the hands that it did, with the
confession that it was extorted from them?"—( Hear, hear.)
Chen, when he said that they should look to the report in
" Hansard," he knew that it was not all couched in the same
language with that in the " Mirror of Parliament," but the
sense of it was the same. It was as follows:—" The Right
Hon. Gentleman, however, said that even then (that was in
182 i) he was satisfied something must be done to conciliate
I -eland. If, then, he was satisfied as to the necessity of con-
ciliation, and if he was thus abandoned by his supporters, why
did he not consent, and lend his assistance to Mr. Canning in
the accomplishment of that object?"- (Heat, hear.) But
wee that the only comment that was made upon the conduct of
the Right Hon. Baronet ? There was at that time, in that
House, a warm supporter of Protestant ascendancy, Mr.
Michael Thomas Sadler—( Hear)—and what was the language
that Mr. Sadler used on this occasion ? Why, he said, " Long-
winded orations, passages which led to nothing—( Hear)—
could never set this matter in an honest light before the
country.—(Cheers.) They can comprehend it as little as
the question of emancipation, in which they are declared to be
so ignorant and besotted. They were, however, beguiled by
Peel's explanation. So was I. I was one of them. 1 thought
the conduct of the Noble and Right Hoe. individual concerned
sacrificed a principle to consistency. What it was it is
not worth while to inquire, since it was anything rather than
that. It is now too late to rectify the error ; all that remains
is to regret most deeply that those who have so secretly, sud-
denly, and unceremoniously deserted us should have so con-
ducted themselves with regard to that highly-gifted individual,
unhappily now no more, as one who ought not to serve his
king and country as the head of the Government, because he
was favourable to a measure and now so indecently forced upon
to country." Mr. Sadler said, "I do heartily repent of my
share in it, and the too successful attempts to hunt
down so noble an individual—a man whom England,
and the world would not fail to recognise as its orna-
ment ; whose eloquence was, in these days at least, unrivalled;
the energies of whose capacious mind, stored by knowledge and
enervated by genius, were devoted to the service of his country;
the qualities of whose generous heart led those who spoke of
them to reel Liitt warmth or ins frlirusitntirtp,wtitcti, 7 betleVe,
could only be equalled by its stability. Had I had the honour
of having a seat in the House at that time, I should have eon-
scientionaly opposed him on that occasion, but with feelings
very different from those who then oppo..od him. Those gen-
tlemen who said it was impossible to act with such a
Minister, and for reasons which vitiate their present
doings, implying therefrom that as the transaction with
such a person the annals of our country could not
furnish so disgraceful a page. But, passieg to his memory, my
humble tribute is paid when it can can be no longer heard or
regarded—when it is drowned by the voice of interested adu-
intim poured only into the ears of the living. But his
character is rescued, and rises in triumph over surviving—
what shall I call them? Let their own consciences supply the
name."—( Loud cheers.) That was the comment of Mr.
Sadler—( Hear)—upon this same speech of the Right Hon.
Baronet; and it might be remembered too by those who heard
Mr. Sadler wind up another soul-stirring speech to the same
effect. The speech in the " Mirror of Parliament" was no
doubt the speech of the Hon. Baronet, collected from all the
reports supplied to the newspapers by all the reporters
in that gallery (said the Noble Lord, pointing to the
reporter,' gallery). Then it was not attempted to be
denied that the speech in " Hansard" was also correct. But
in 1623 the lien. Baronet did what he had done in 1325, with
this addition, namely, that he was prepared to pass the measure
through Parliament. There could be no doubt now, that the
communication referred to was a verbal one, and that his
writtenresig-
nerit,. Thestatement. This case must
Right Han. Baronet
but it should be known that it was the practice of reporters
hadt standio nsaid on
w a
that hta tendered
s t a
reporterintrinsic
t irnin a
of the
m
(silly to take their notes for a quarter of an hour at a time.
This paragraph occurred far down in this four hours' speech,
whereas the Right. Hon. Baronet was alluding to the mistakes
that occurred in the early part of the report. He had compared
the report in he " Times" and in " Hansard," and he found
that there were 66 words in one report, and only 38 in the
other. This sufficiently proved to bins that the report
ad been tampered with. When the Right Hon. Baronet
was queting " Hansard" against him, he had looked him
steadily in the face, to see what effect the witness of that
book would have upon him. He read steadily enough whilst
quoting what passed in 1827, but when he came to what passed
in 1829, he would not say the book almost fell from his hands,
but he threw it from him as if afraid any longer to retain it in
his grasp.—(Cheers. )
Sir W. JAMES rose to order. The Noble Lord, he con-
ceived, might state facts, but he had no right to speak of
feelings.
The SPEAKER decided that his Lordship might proceed.
Lord GORGE BENTINCK—The Bight Honourable
Baronet had acknowledged that •he had altered that
report in " Hansard," for there was a note to that
effect at the bottom of the page. That speech was severely
'dealt with by Sir Edward Knatchbull, and was much ques-
tioned by a Noble Lord. He held with no such double-deal-
ing as this by a Minister high in the confidence of his Sove-
reign. The Right Hon. Gentleman was a great reformer of
th,, criminal law, and he pleaded the Statute of Limitations
on the charges which had been brought against him. The
Right Honourable Baronet should bear in mind that the
law of limitations only applied to the law of debtors, and not
to criminal offences. The Right Hon. Baronet had com-
mitted two offences—they were great in magnitude, and be
should bear in mind that. the country would not forgive two
great crimes. He (Lord G. Bentinck) had been charged
with bringing up an old offence with regard to the name of
Mr. Canning. Had he done so without provocation—had
he made one charge that was not borne out in fact? He was
there not to mike false charges • but while he had the honour
of a seat in that House, he would denounce political profligacy.
The Right Honourable Baronet had charged him with using
ianguage unbecoming a Member of that House. When
the Honourable Speaker was first proposed to sit in
that Cheir, he (Lord G. Flentine.k) voted against
him, for the Right Honourable Gentleman was then
untried. He was, however, elected by a small majority, and
the next time the Right Hon. Gentleman was proposed, he
(Lord G. Bentinek) voted for him, because his decisions had
always been Trost impartial. With such a Right Hon. Gentle-
man in that chair, he (the Noble Lord) believed that language
unbecoming a Member of that House could not b. used
without calling for his interference.—( Hear, hear.) He bad
used no language but what was quite legitimate and just.—
( Hear, hear.) He used language denouncing the political
profligacy of those who had sold their constituencies.
Mr. ESCOTT—Who sold,them—who ?
Lord GEORGE BE'NTLICK—You ask me who, and I
say you, sir. I have the honour of being one of your con-
stituents, and I have the means of learning some of the secrets
of the city of Winchester He had made such a c,,se as the
Hight Hon. Baronet failed to answer so as to disprove it, and
he was now willing, and he was now ready, to leave it to the
judgment of an impartial English public.--(Cheers.
Sir JOHN HANMER said that the Noble Lord was very
parial to making a comparison between his own speeches and
those of Mr. Fox ; but he (Sir John Hanmer) differed in
opinion with the Noble Lord as to the force and vigour of the
speeches of both. He was prepared to prove that the Noble
Lord hail spoken to the electors of Lynn as a supporter of the
Right Hon. Baronet. He was not one to rake up old
soeeches, as he but occasionally dipped into the newspapers,
he aha ostdeersp,iactuda
heir leadingfiewbeel ena di
Ili ncra celdi nt
that he had been so ready to
had said in his speeches, seeingread
and then onlyofpoprotnheentssp.eecßheu
of other parties. He would an
little out of his usual course to inquire what the Noble Lord
Noble Lord given in the " Norfolk
extract of a speech of the
The speech was spoken at the Lynn
Chronicle" Ju'y 3, 1841.
Lord distinctly
said. that in 1335 he
election ; and the Noble •
Y Ministry of the day.
Now, Conservative
vote the speeches
was elected to support t
Lord Stanley, whom the
Hon. Bart, was at variance with
motion for electing Noble Lord (Lord George Bentinek) had represented as his
Now, let the House bear in mind that at that time the Right
grew deal has h
political leader. He found also that -the :Noble Lord the-
and all the leading Member for Lynn supported the- Right Hon. Baronet on the
Conservative par • ,
ty a.‘, led on
.y the Right Hon. Baronet. The Noble Lord was, therefore,
Iso Baronet A
eat in oeent of the charges h
ggmMnatinonnesrsofStuhtetocon
nesse Speaker of th.: House,
election , that event might
seenin
relation what
useQii.ntsionae sn -aid about a general
seharnaosetdbo arrive,o
augadnh
dtt zhmli
nOw3
itth otwhnoeounwdigop.bliet
the people cf England
raid btu.