The Sun.
London, England, 1832-01-27 00:00:00

GENERAL FAST.

Mr. PERCEVAL rose, and addressing the Speaker'
said, " I perceive strangers in the House."
Mr. IIUAIE—I presume I may move the suspension °
ll
the standing order.
The SPEAKER then ordered the gallery to be cleared. .J
Mr. PERCEVAL could speak with more boldness
the absence of the public. Ile could persuade the Ale',
hers who are all of them baptised, and not allow the publi;;
to kt.ow the blasphemies that might be spoken in antivi'
to his speech—that the blasphemers, if any, in this
insight not be able to give publicity to their blasphemieg
That was the excuse for clearing the House of strange
God was present amongst us, and he would witness
that passed. I i the name of God the highest, he appeol
to the House and as it was written in his word, that ?),,
who rejected him that appeared in the name of God ii
spired him that sent him, he that rejected him (Mr. I' r;
ceval), rejected his God, in whose name he appeared. *
would risk being tedious, in order to be understood. Yr(
was afraid to read the book he held in his hand (I,it
Bible,) but he would read it. No roan could deny tIP33
the state of the nation was truly deplorable. Nothing h t
altered his opinion since he last addressed the House °e,
this subject. The nation trembled on the verge (4'll
stroction—no man could calculate on subordination in $5:,
society—in every district there were disorders. The,
was also the frightful collision of the two Houses of I)4r
liament. The Louses of the nobles anti gentry vr`'
entered anti pillaged—one of the cities plundered t,'
robbed by the mob. Two pal ties were threatening a c'j,
flict so manifest, that amidst ull these things, every 1.11)
of considerate mind should consider their ways and Ole
them. Shall we not bow down before that God wp°:if
hand is on us—consider our ways, and go down on 19
knees to supplicate that mercy which is gone from it
Ile would read the grounds of a nation's prosperity. r
nation stands as Jerusalem formerly stood. It has bee-0
tire seat of true religion, and has reared up the finest 5Y9t,,,0
of civil polity that ever existed ; and if we be as Jerusl'''
was, we must suffer ((pally :
'Woe unto thee, Chorazin, woe unto thee, Rethsaida ;
the mighty works which were done in you were done in '':jlo
and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth
ashes. 0,1
But I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre
Sidon at the day ofjudgment than for you.
t. And thou, Capernatim, which are exalted unto He''ic'
shalt be Wrought down to Hell : for it the mighty works W.

trAe been done in thee had been done in Sodom, it would have
re ',N* ined until this day.
~.But I say-imto you it shall be snore tolerable for 'lyre and
Sid o ti at the day of judgment than for you."
e then read further :

" And all these blessings shall come on thee, and overtake
thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God.
" Blessed shalt thou be in the city, and blessed shalt thou be in
the field.

" Blessed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy
ground, and the fruit of thy cattle, the increase of thy trine, and
the flocks of thy sheep.
" Blessed shall be thy basket and thy store.
" Blessed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and blessed shalt
thou be when thou goest out.
" The Lord shall cause thine enemies that rise up against thee
to be smitten before thy face ; they shall conic out against thee
one way, and flee before thee seven ways.
" The Lord shall command the blessing upon thee in thy
More-houses, and in all that thou settest thine hand unto : and
he shall bless thee in the land which the Lord thy God giveth
thee. .

"The Lord shall establish thee an holy people with himself,
as he bath sworn unto thee, if thou shalt keep the command-
ments of the Lord thy God, and walk in his ways.
" And all people of the earth shall see that thou art called by
the name of the Lord, and they shall be afraid of thee.
" And the Lord shall make thee plenteous in goods, in the
fruit of thy body, and in the fruit of thy cattle, and in the fruit
of thy ground in the land which the Lord sware unto thy fathers
to give thee.
" The Lord shall open unto thee his good treasures, the I leaven
to give the rain unto thy land in his season, and to bless all the
work of thine hand : and thou shalt lend unto many nations, and
thou shalt not borrow.
" And the Lord shall make thee the head and not the tail, and
thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath ; if that
thou hearken unto the commandments of the Lord thy God
which I command thee this day to observe and to do them.
" And thou shalt not go aside from any of the words which I
command thee this day, to the right hand or to the left, to go
after other Gods to serve them."

Great and glorious had been the conduct of England, when
the Admiral wrote home that " it had pleased the Almighty
to bless his Majesty's arms." He then read the converse—
" But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the
voice of the Lord thy bed, to observe to do all his command-
ments and his statutes which I command thee this day, that all
these curses shall come upon thee and overtake thee :
" Cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in
the field_

" Cursed shall be thy basket and thy store.
Cursed shall be the fruit of thy body and the fruit of thy
land, the Increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.
" Cursed shalt thou be when thou contest in, and cursed shalt
thou be when thou goest out.
" The Lord shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke
in all that thou settest thy hand unto for to do, until thou be de-
stroyed, and until thou perish quickly ; because of the wicked-
ness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken me.
The Lord shall snake the pestilence cleave unto thee, until he
have consumed thee from off the land whither thou goest to
possess it.

" The Lord shall smite thee with a consumption, and with a
lever, and with an inflammation, and with an extreme burning,
and with the sword, and with blasting, and with mildew; and
they shall pursue thee until thou perish.
" And the Heaven that is over thy head shall be brass, and the
earth that is under thee shall be iron.
" The Lord shall make the rain of thy land powder and dust ;
from Heaven shall it come down upon thee, until,thou be destroyed.
" The Lord shall cause thee to be smitten before thine ene-
rnieg ; thou shalt go out one way against them, and flee seven
ways before them ; and shalt be removed into all the kingdoms o
the earth.
" And thy carcase shall be meat unto all the fowls of the air,
and unto the beasts of the earth, and no man shall fray them away.
" The Lord shall smite thee with the botch of Egypt, and with
the emerods, and with the scab, and with the itch, whereof thou
canst not be healed.

The Lord shall smite thee with madnesss, and blindness, and
astonishment of heart.

" And thou shalt grope at noon-day as the blind gropeth in
darkness, and thou shalt not prosper in thy ways, and thou shalt
be only oppressed and spoiled evermore, and no man shall save
thee."

That pestilence is now in the land, and we ought to hasten
to address the throne to proclaim a fast and holy day in
the land. We have here the truth. We have departed
from our God, and God has departed from us. And un-
less this nation come on their knees, destruction is on us.
Ent if we return to God's ways we may effect forgiveness
and blessedness. England is not the country of peace,
glory, and strength, that it wa., and we ought to repent
and return from our evil ways. Although we deserve the
punishment of our sins, yet, if we repent, God's mercy
is abundant, and we may yet be saved. I speak on
authority not to be denied. The Word of God has ex.
pressed it,—even when a curse against a nation has been
given :
" If that nation against whom I have pronounced turn from
their evil, I will repent of the evil I thought to tiounto them."
Innumerable were the instances of God's mercy—as when
the Prophet went against Ahab, but he humbled himself,
and God withdrew the judtnent. There was the same fact
in the case of Jonah in Nineveh—
" Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown."
If these applied to Heathens, how much more will God's
mercy be shown to a nation of Christians? The Hon.
Member then read the proceeding. respecting Nineveh :
"So the people of Nineveh believed God and proclaimed a
fast, awl put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the
least of them.

" For word came unto the King of Nineveh, and he arose from
his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with
sackcloth, and sat in ashes.
44 And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through
Nineveh (by the Decree of the King and his Nobles), saying,
Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste anything; let
them not feed nor drink water.

But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry
mightily unto God; yea, let them turn every one from his evil
way, and from the violence that is in their hands.

Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from
his fierce anger, and we perish not.
And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil
way, and God repented him of the evil that he had said he
would do unto them, and he did it not."

So will it be with England, if we faithfully, humbly, and
sincerely repent. I trust I shall be able to set before the
nation the truth of its weakness—first, the increase of
crime shows the absence of religion and piety ; secondly,
the oppression of the poor was beyond his conception. He
was lost in astonishment. The fact was so great that he
could not account for it. The first lived in luxury and
plenty; the labourer in a state of actual starvation, and a
degree of distress that would harrow up your very souls.
He could not point out the causes, but the fact was glar-
ing. He appealed to Mr. Sadler to point out the suffer.
ings of the children of the poor. The heathens made their
children pass through the fire to their god, Moloch—we
make our children pass through misery for our gain. The
destruction of Bristol is a sample of God's wrath when
abroad in the land. Passing that and the pestilence, the
state of the poor is enough to induce this House to address
the Crown to order a fast. It must not be supposed that
he was a fool to call on this House, which he did, as a
body, only in love and truth. You sit here (said the Hon.
Member) infidels—you do not con•ult your Maker. This
House meets here, and talks on public affairs as if there
was no God. Let every man answer for himself. You
have no more consideration than if you acknowledged no
God. You are all infidels. Look at the public Press,
the march of intellect, the spirit of the day is sheer ido-
latry. You forget God, and think of doing every thing by
capital, by machinery, by laws, &c.; but you are acting
on a wrong principle. All those acts of ungodliness had
been practised by other nations. For example, the French
left out that " the King ruled by the grace of God ;"
also that blasphemy in England, " that all power was
from the people"—sheer blasphemy, as all power is from
God, and the duty of man is to submit and to obey !
" Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers, for there is
no power but of God ; the powers that be are ordained of God.
" 'Whosever, therefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordi-
nance of God ; and they that resist shall receive to themselves
damnation.

" For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil ;
wilt thou then not be afraid of the power ? do that which is good,
and thou shalt have praise of the same.
"For he is the Minister of God to thee for good ; but if thou
do that which is evil, be afraid : for he beareth not the sword in
vain : for he is the Minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath
upon hint that doeth evil."

See what is going on in France and England. It is
blasphemy to attribute power to the people. He defied
the Noble Lord to point out a :word in the Bible that
power was from the people; that slavish bowing to public
opinion that robbed the Noble Lord of all his honesty
and manhood. In the Councils of the nation there were
slaves to that blasphemy—but power was only from
God. He was aware he was speaking loud and with
warmth, but not with violence ; be was sincere, and
was urging these truths in his usual way, when he
was under an influence. The motion belonged to each
Member individually, as every man had bee❑ bap-
tised into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost, and could not disobey the precepts and laws
of their God. They might disregard the laws—father
and brother, but would they refuse the precepts of God ?
" I was taken up," said the lion. Member, " on-the
death of my father, by the nation, which abundantly pro-
vided for me and mine ; and it is in gratitude for that
kindness that I call on that House to address the Crown
to issue a Proclamation for a fast. It has been done be-
fore by Parliament, and I do not admit the objection that
This place is not a fit and proper place. Are we not chosen
to meet and advise what, as Christians, we ought to advise
for the good of the nation ? Are we to leave all religion at
the door of the House, and listen to the wiles of Satan? No.
I stated it last year, and I will repeat the character of infi-
delity that pervade the public mind. At that time there
was the blasphemous proposition to admit the Jew into
this House. If our Saviour was raised, and is now in
Heaven, at the head of his Church, are we to admit a Jew
to our Councils ? The Edinburgh Review, the fifth sign
of the infidelity of the tittles, defended that. Man is a fool
in his heart, and sayeth those things. It was en-
ormous that this body of Christians should say we are
not inclined to consider of God's greatness and mercy ; if
so ungodly as to entertain the question, what a state was
the nation in ? The bent of the bun= mind is now to set
aside Kings and Priests, and to set up the people as the
Sovereigns ; and I would call on the nation to humiliate
themselves, and to avert such evils. Let the Kings and
Priests be expelled, and all such mummery be averted, un-
less you will listen to my voice for a fast and humiliation.
If) ou agree, I will request the House of Lords also to sup-
plicate for a fast, and we all then be bound up together
in one solemn act. He would not withdraw his motion
as he did last year; be would not give way, but would

divide the House. He would force the House of Co►u-
mons to declare whether they would bend their knee to
their God. If they would not, the nation should know
their refusal. He would have the whole nation, the
Lords, and Commons, to join iu the act of humilia-
tion. The Ministers had done it—the House of Com-
mons had put it aside. But by that anointed name
by which he acted, he would appeal to them, and it
must be done. Moving the previous question would
❑ot do ; the House must reject the motion. If they did
all Europe would see (said the Hon. Member) that ye re-
ject your God's authority. You cannot escape this charge.
By the name and blood of that Saviour, I implore you to
support this motion. But he bad been told formerly, that
in this blasphemous and unhallowed atmosphere he ought
not to have used that name. But it is in that blessed
name—the name of that living God and S iviour, who now
sees you, and is amongst you—that I alone appeal and act.
Christian men should love to see him call on the name of
him in whose name you were baptised. Cast not off the
reverence due to that name; beware of that infidelity that
is creeping on you on both sides of the House, and de-
priving you of your manhood ; for the safety of your own
souls I call on you to honour that name. I have done my
duty to avert the evils that are coming on Christendom,
preceded by the pestilence. Beware of the wrath that
went forth on the plain against Sodom and Gomorrah—
and those are a type of the judgment that is fast coining
upon Christendom. My cry is that God's mercy may be
on us if we humble ourselves. Let all the people praise and
sing for joy, and the desolating force of God shall pass by.
The Hon. Member concluded by moving, that an humble
address be presented to the King, to order a day for a ge-
neral fast and humiliation.

After some pause, the motion was seconded by Mr.
WEYLAND, of Hedon.

Lord ALTHORP stated that discussion on such a topic
was highly inexpedient. That he disclaimed being tinc-
tured with infidelity ; but he was of opinion that such dis-
cussions did not tend to the honour of religion. The mo-
tion was neither desirable nor necessary. He gave Mr.
Perceval credit for good intentions. Ha meant no disre-
spect to him by not following him in his argument, and
should move the previous question ; by which he intended
that the House should express its opinion, that questions
like the present ought not to be taken up. It was the in-
tention of Government to appoint a day of fasting.
Mr. HUNT could not avoid reading two or three verses
from the Bible. The Honourable Mover had talked of
Sodom and of Biiitol, and had called us infidels, idolaters,
and what not. He then read a passage from Isaiah,
" Is it such a fast that I have chosen, a day for man to afflict
his soul ? Is it to bow down his head as a bulrush, and to spread
sackcloth and ashes under him ? Wilt thou call this a fast, and
an acceptable day to the Lord ?
" Is not this the fast that I have chosen, to loose the bands of
wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and let the oppressed
go free, and that ye break every yoke ?
" Is it not to deal the bread to the hungry, and that thou
bring the poor that are cast out to thy house ? When thou
seest the naked that thou cover him, and that thou hide not
thyself from thine own flesh."
_ _ _

And added that this was not a real fast, but the real
fast was one that would feed the hungry and clothe the
naked.

Mr. GOULBURN understood the Noble Lord to say,
that the object would be accomplished without going to
the vote. If the Noble Lord did not make such a promise,
he hoped the motion would be pressed.
Sir THOS. BARING would vote for the motion, if
a fast day were not to be appointed.

Lord ALTHORP—It is the intention of the Govern-
ment to appoint a fast day.

Mr. BRISCOE heard -the declaration of the Noble Lord
with pleasure, and it was to him an additional reason for
affording his support to the present Government.
Mr. GORDON (Dundalk) said it was a question
highly fitting to occupy the time of the House of Com-
mons ; and that the House of Commons in former times
wls often occupied with such discussions.
Mr. PERCEVAL, in answer to the Member for Pres-
ton, observed that a fast of hypocrisy was in no way ac-
ceptable to Him that itidgeth the human heart. But which
of the two was more likely to observe the fast of mercy?
he who set aside, as unnecessary, all signs of public con-
trition—or he who, consenting to such public acts, ac-
knowledged the impropriety of ungodliness when going
through the fast of humiliation ? He would not state what
he felt, if he did not say that the tardy consent at length
given to the appointment of a day for a General Fast
showed him with what reluctance the Government at
length assented. He thought that this was done more for
the sake of getting rid of the question than for any better
motive. He believed this from the delay. He saw no
reason for delay. The danger of delay was imminent.
He still suspected that they never meant to do it. He
would not withdraw the motion, but would take the
sense of the House upon it, though he did not intend to
press it to a division.

RUSSIAN DUTCH LOAN.

Immediately after our re-admission to the gallery,

Mr. lIERRIES rose to make his promised motion on
the subject of the Russian Dutch loan. The first point
in the case was the application of the public money, not
only without the authority of Parliament, but, in his
judgment, directly contrary to the directions of Parlia-
ment. At the close of the period when that House was
last assembled, the attention of his Right Hon, Friend
the Member for Tamworth having been called to the fact,
that certain public funds had been applied without the
authority of Parliament, explanations had taken place
across the table, the result of which, by the admission of
facts, tended to diminish the tirne which it would other-
wise be necessary for him to occupy. The House were
aware that he was now about to propose a declaration of
their opinion on this question—that an.engagement having
been entered into by this country to pay a foreign loan in
another country, with certain conditions annexed ; and
those conditions having been notoriously fulfilled and dis-
charged, payment, nevertheless, continued to be male ;
although, in the opinion of all persons conversant with
subjects of that kind, such payment must be manifestly
contrary to the stipulations of the engagement. There
might have been doubts as to the fact of the fulfilment of
the conditions; there might have been doubts as to the
real independence of the 13,1gie provinces ; but that had
been admitted by the other side of the House. It had
been admitted that the separation between Belgium and
Holland, which formed the condition of the engagement,
had actually taken place. It had also been admitted that
subsequently to that separation money had been paid by
this country in satisfaction of the Russian loan in Hol-
land. The difference between the two sides of the House
resolved itself into this—was it, or was it not, lawful for
the Ministera of ti e Crown, after the separation, to make
the payments in question? It was indispensable, in order
to put the House in possession of the case, and to enable
them to come to a judgment upon it, that he should enter
into several minute details, to which he prayed attention,
notwithstanding their dullness. The origin of the trans-
action was an engagement to pay a debt due to Russia
I,y Holland, not in the discharge of any debt or any en-
gagement from England to Russia, but in discharge of an
engagement from England to Holland. He would call the
attention of the House to the first convention—in which
there was much that had no relation to this subject—and
direct their attention to that part of it on which the
whole of this transaction was founded, and from which
every obligation of this country proceeded. To the con-
vention of the 17th August, 1814, there was an addi-
tional article, in which it was stipulated, " that, to
provide for the defence and incorporation of the Belgic
Provinces with Holland, Sze., there should be a sum paid
to Sweden of 1,000,0001. ; a sum of two millions ad-
vanced to Holland for fortifications ; and thirdly, a
condition that this country should bear, equally with
Holland, such further charges as might be agreed
upon between the high contracting parties and their
allies, towards the final and satisfactory settlement
of the Low Countries in union with Holland, and
under the dominion of the House of Orange, not ex-
ceeding, in the whole, the sum of three millions, to be
defrayed by Great Britain. The expression in the French
was more strong--it was to the effect ; " conjointly, and
in equal shares with Holland." This was an indefinite en-
gagement to pay such sums in conjunction with Holland,
in order to secure the incorporation of the Belgic provinces
with that country. This indefinite engageni-nt was ren-
dered a specific engagement in the subsequent treaty of the
19th of May, 1815. In that treaty his Majesty the King
of the Netherlands declares " that he is resolved to pro-
ceed immediately to execute, with his Imperial Majesty, a
convention to the following effect, to which his Britannic
Majesty agrees to be a party, in pursuance of engagements
taken by his said Majesty with the King of the Nether-
lands in a convention signed at London on the 13th of
August, 1814." This treaty had also relation to certain
colonies which were to he ceded to this country. But it
was clear from the beginning to the end of all our obliga-
tions that we stipulated for the interest of the King of
Holland, and in conjunction with him, for the purpose of
sustaining the incorporation of the Belgic provinces with
the Netherlands. All that he had to state was founded on
these treaties, and on the Act of Parliament framed in con-
sequence of them. He referred to them in order to show
to what definite point it was brought at last. There was not
a part of the treaties in question that was not carefully
worded. It was invariably stated that equal payments were
to be made by England and Holland. In truth, any other
proposition would have been most wild and monstrous.
Acting, however, as he thought, illegally, the Government
of this country continued to pay our part, while our
partners ceased to pay their part. The stipulation was to

pay ;n eornmes, and only in common, with Holland. In
o~ der to be consistent with the original transaction, and to
mark the character of that transaction in the strongest
manner, a clause had been introduced into the second
treaty, highly befitting the state of things. That clause
declared, " That it is hereby understood arid agreed be-
tween the high contracting parties, that the said pay-
ments on the part of their Majesties the King of the
Netherlands and the King of Great Britain shall cease and
should the possession and sovereignty (which
God forbid) of the Belgic provinces at any time pass or be
severed from the dominions of his Majesty the King of the
Netherlands, previous to the complete liquidation of the
same." That was a correct stipulation ; that was con-
! •
sistent with the principles of the bond. If that stipula-
tion had not existed, it might still have been well argued
that the payments were not to be continued should a sepa-
ration of the Belgic provinces take place ; but by this
stipulation such payments were absolutely prohibited in
the event of a separation. It made assurance doubly sure.
It not only stated the limits, but it forbade their infraction.
What were the facts ? That on the one side, that of
Holland, the payments had ceased, and determined ;
that on the other side, that of England (a different
view having been taken of the case), they had been
continued ; in spite of the prohibition contained in the
last treaty, and in spite of the co-partner feeling that
she was entirely relieved from further contribu-
tion. When the attention of the House was first drawn
to this case, and when the Noble Lord conceded the
facts which he (Mr. Herries) had mentioned, they ap-
peared to him (Mr. Herties) so manifest a contradiction
of the Lew and of the Act of Parliament, that he really an.
ticipatcd that before the next meeting of Parliament any
motion on the subject would be rendered unnecessary, by
a st itement on the part of his Majesty's Government of
mounds for their conduct different from those of which
the House were already in possession. He did not expect
that it would have fallen to his lot, or to that of anyother
Hon. Member, to make such a motion as the present. He
certainly thought that some explanation must be made
upon the subject. By their silence and inaction, however,
his Majesty's Ministers had impressed his mind with a
conviction that they viewed the treaty in a manner, which
in his opinion was so contrary, he would not say merely to
low, but to common sense—a treaty too drawn up in a
much plainer manner than that in which treaties were
usual'y composed--that lie could not have conceived it
possible.—(Hear, hear.) It must be admitted either that
there was no virtue in the words that the payments should
cease when the Belgic Provinces were separated and de-
tached from Holland, or that the payments might be con-
tinued, consistently with those words. It might have been
supposed that there were some doubts as to the reading of
the treaty, and also to its origin. But they had it from
the authority of the Lords of the Treasury, to whose
department the execution of the treaty was, of course,
peculiarly confided, for with such a case the King had no-
thing to do, no use could be made of the King's name in
this question.—( Hear, hear.) When Parliament gave
directions for the payment of money, those who received
such directions were only Ministerial. Those directions '
must also be strictly construed. If an Act of Parliament
were considered not sufficiently extensive, no Lord of the
Treasury could presume to enlarge it. Parliament must
be resorted to for that purpose. But the Treasury had
justly interpreted the Act to which he had been alluding.
When he (Mr. Herries) called for an account of the
money which bad been advanced to Holland under the
first treaty, a return had been made perfectly correct in its
character. In ISIS, the Treasury had been called upon
by the Finance committee for an account not only of the
sums advanced on the loan, but for a statement of the con-
ditions of the loan itself. The return of that motion was
mode, and it concluded with a statement " that the pay-
ments upon the said loan were to cease and determine
should the Belgic provinces be separated from Holland."—
(Hear, hear.) It now appeared, however, that notwith-
standing this distinctly recorded understanding by the de-
partment, whose duty it was to carry the treaty into
effect, of the nature of its conditions ; notwithstanding
what was recorded in the treaty ; notwithstanding
the distinct statement in the Act of Parliament founded
on the treaty—that the payments in question should be
made by the Lords of the Treasury as they became due,
as long as it was specified in the convention that
they should continue; notwithstanding this strict qualifica-
tion and limit of that which, to all common understand-
ings, must have been perfectly intelligible, even without
qualification and limit ; notwithstanding the fact, that the
Power associated with this country in these payments (in
truth the principal Power), understanding well the terms
of its engagement, had refused to make further payments :
we had continued during the last three terms of payment
to make them.—(Hear, hear.) At the three last terms
of payment the Dutch had refused their contribution. It
not being necessary for his argument to state technically,
the period of the separation of the Belgian provinces from
Holland, he had worded his resolution generally. The
Hon. Gentleman hare recapi!ulated his arguments, and
maintained that on the face of these transactions there was
not at present an iota of claim upon this country for fur-
ther payments. He had shown that this was not a debt
from this country to Russia, but only a debt in concur-
rence with Holland. Yet the conduct pursued would go
to show that it was a debt from this country to Russia;
not with the concurrence of Holland, but alone. Really,
after all that he could conjecture with respect to
the nature of the defence which Ministers might set
up, he was unable to arrive at any decent objec-
tion which could be made to the validity of his state-
ments, or ally decent answer which could be made
to the argument founded upon them. If tl:e whole
case had not been before Parliament, it was the duty
of hie Majesty's Government to have come down
and stated that fact. Such not having been done,
it was natural to suppose that Parliament was already in
possession of the whole case, and lie trusted they would
put upon it the only construction to which it was open.
He had heard—but he really could not believe his Majesty's
Government would have recourse to such a defence—it
was intended to declare that inasmuch as by our conductwe
had given, if not encouragement, at least permission, to
the Belgians to assert their independence, and to leeparate
themselves from Holland, we were not entitled to benefit
by the conditions of the bond, but must continue to make
the paytnents from which those conditions would other-
wise have relieved us. He could not, however, conceive
it possible such a defence would be made. Was it in the
power of a Government to act in direct contradiction to
Parliament, and to give authority to its acts independent
of that with which Parliament had invested them ? If
so, then he was sure the House might at once abandon
their character of being the guardians of the public purse.
He came, therefore, to the conclusion, almost an absur-
dity, and one which lie approached with wonder, that he
and his Majesty's Ministers read the Act of Parliament
differently—that the words of that Act did not bear the
slate import in the mind of the Noble Lord and the Hon.
Gentlemen opposite, as they (lid in the mind of those who
sat on his (Mr. Ilerries's) side of the House. If the
words of the Act were loose, he might think this
was an easy solution of the difficulty ; but they were so
precise, so specific, so cautious, that he was at a
loss to conceive how any correct understanding could feel
the slightest doubt as to their tendency. They were clear
in the treaty ; they were clear in the Act of Parliament.
This was a question of peculiar importance at a time when
the income of the country was in so low a state that it was
inadequate to meet the expenditure. At the same time he
was far from saying that they ought not to do every tiling
that was consistent with good faith. But here all the
facts, which he hoped he had stated distinctly, proved that
the national faith was in no way implicated. The ques.
tion appeared to him to be one of such immense import-
ance, that he had carefully avoided all topics which related
to differences of opinion on political subjects. He had
abstained from treatiog it as a party question. Ile had
resisted the opportunity which the subject afforded him of
reof the
rigid
dindpirnignetihpoisees whosewhi conchtdhuecyt lie
formerlyimpugned,l,rofessedin
all
cases of a similar nature. He had done so, because he
and thoughttenp tehre;qutielsattioint
sehhoouull:11
be
te ddiesteeursasieidaed different
with tone
in a
re-
ference to the authority of Parliament, and to the privi-
lege which the Constitution had conferred upon it us the
disposal of the public money. At the same time it was
solely
impossible not to forget that the gentlemen on the
other side, in their jealous controul of the public expen-
diture, ha I long been in the habit of charging the gen-
tlemen on his side of the House with great laxity on
that point. He (lid not wish to rerive the discussions
to which he alluded ; but he did wish to impress
the House with the feeling that their decision on the pre-
sent occasion might be referred to at a future time, as a
test of the proper disposal of the public money. In con-
clusion, he contended that all persons who wished to effect
a saving to the country, and all those who desired to con-
tinue the salutary controul of the Parliament over the
public expenditure, bhuuld support his motion. The
Right Hon. Gentleman then moved three resolutions to the
following effect :—" First, That, by the 25th of George
111. for carrying into effect the convention between his
Britannic Majesty, the King of the Netherlands, and toe
Emperor of the Russias, power was given to the Com-
missioners of the Treasury to give such sums as were re-
quired for interest and principal in certain proportion.
of the Russian loan in Holland, discharged in pursuance
of the convention made by this Government from time to
time, and at such times as they became payable, and so

—ong as they are payable, conformably to the tenour of his
lajesty's engagements, as specified in the convention.--
The second provided, that this payment was to cease and
determine, should the possession of Belgium pass from or
he severed from the sovereignty of the King of the
Netherlands previous to the complete liquidation of the
debt.—The third declared that the payment of any portion
of this Russian loan in Holland after the possession of
Belgium should have passed or been severed from the so-
vereignty of the King of the Netherlands, was contrary to
the provisions of the 55th of Geo. 111., c. 113, and un-
warranted by any authority of Parliament."
Lord ALTHORP admitted that the subjct was well
worthy the best consideration of the House, and allowed
that the Right Hon. Gentleman had argued the question
very fairly—that was to sty in the main body of his
speech —but he thought that in the conclusion he had in-
troduced some topics which ought not to be taken into
the consideration of the House.—(Hear, hear.) The
Right Hon. Gentleman had appealed to those who wished
to save the public money to support him with their vote ;
but the question was one which ought not to be regarded
with any reference to public economy. If the public faith
was pledged, there was, he was convinced, no gentleman
in this House who would allow a consideration of economy
to interfere with the due execution of other engagements
entered into by the Crown and approved by both Houses
of Parliament.—(Cheers.) Therefore he hoped that in
considering the question, the saving of the public money
would be entirely set aside. He trusted, in a word, that
gentlemen would not deem themselves justified in voting
for the Right Hon. Gentleman's motion, because there
would be thereby a saying of the public money. He ad-
mitted that if the Government were not justified by the
treaty and the Act of Parliament which embodied in it pay-
ing the money, they could not be justified at all..
(Hear.) But be contended that if by the treaty of the
Crown was bound to make this payment, the Act which
embodied the treaty undoubtedly must justify the payment;
because the Act was passed to enable the Crown to fulfill
its engagements by the treaty. But the Right Hon.
Gentleman argued that the treaty did not compel the pay-
ment of the money. He would say, that if he had been
satisfied on this point, as he would have been glad to have
been, he should have acted upon it. And he did hope, that
upon a full examination of the spirit and principle of the
treaty he should have been so satisfied. But when he did
consider that treaty, which imposed upon the Crown a
share of the loan or else involved a breach of faith, he felt
upon consideration that no idea of escaping from it ought
to be entertained by the Government. It was no longer
time to consider whether the engagements entered into in
1815 were prudent or otherwise, or whether it was or was
not proper to conclude them—they had only to look to the
treaty as it bound the country. In considering the treaty,
they were tolook to the spirit and object which was in view.
And he contended that it was perfectly clear the provision
against disseverance clearly contemplated external violence
and not internal commotion. The Right Han. Gentleman
said the object of the treaty was to secure the union between
Holland and Belgium by paying part of the loan to Russia
—that it was made for the benefit of Russia; and the in-
tention was to snake it the interest of Russia to prevent
the severance of Belgium from Holland. In short, that
England was bound to pay a share of the loan in order to
induce Russia to use her influence to give protection to
the union of the two countries. Now, for himself, he
thought that it would be dishonourable, after being parties
to a breach of the condition—namely, the union between
the two countries—to take advantage of this our own act
to escape from our pecuniary engagements. Such conduct
would be eminently dishonourable in a private person, and
lie could not consider it otherwise in a nation. He felt
that upon this occasion he was the responsible Minister,
and he would now clearly state the course he had pursued,
and he trusted that it would be fully established that his in-
tention was to act according to the law, as he believed he
had done. He took the opinion of the Law Officers of the
Crown--(Laughter)—as to whether Government was
compelled to make this payment.—(Hear, hear, and
laughter.) He did not understand those cries of " Hear."
He repeated he took the opinion of the Law Officers of
the Crown upon the subject, and it coincided with his
own. And being convinced the country was compelled to
pay the money, he gave directions to the Exchequer, is-
suing the Treasury order with all the due formalities,
and the Exchequer authorized payment. It was fair
to add, that the auditor (Lord Grenville) had written
to the Treasury to say he felt some doubts on that
subject, but he (Lord Althorp) stated to him the opinion
of the Law Officers of the Crown, when he (Lord G.)
desired to know if his doubts were well founded, and on
receiving this opinion he perfectly concurred in the pay-
ment. He admitted that upon ordinary occasions the
Auditor of the Exchequer felt himself bound to obey the
Treasury orders, but upon this occasion all forms were oh..
served, and everything was referred to the judgment o f
the Auditor. If, then, Ministers had done wrong, they
were responsible for it to the House and to the country.
He did not wish to shrink from his share of the responsi-
bility. He had stated fairly and fully the course which
the Treasury pursued. With respect to the Right Hon.
Gentleman's two first resolutions, he would meet them
by moving the previous question. To the third, which
implied a direct censure on the Government, lie would
propose a direct negative.
Mr. POLLOCK, alter complimenting the Noble Lord
upon his manliness in taking upon himself the responsibi-
lity of the payment, proceeded to contend, that the treaty
referred simply to a separation between Holland and Bel-
gium, and made no sort of allusion whatsoever to the spe-
cies of the separation or the causes of that separation,
against which they wished to provide. If the King of the
Netherlands was not bound to pay, whyshould this country
pay ?--(Loud cheers.) The Noble Lord said, the only
cause of separation contemplated by the treaty was external
force—where did he find that gloss or comment?—
(Cheers.) If the objection of the disseverment was good
for Holland, it was good for us ; and was there a man in
the House who would dare to say it was not good for the
King of Holland ?—(Loud cheers.) But then, said the
Noble Lord, would they take advantage of their own act in
promoting the separation to escape their pecuniary engage-
ment? But the tact was, the disseverance had taken place
before. In November the Belgian Chamber declared Bel-
gium independent. Holland had also agreed to the sepa-
ration, when the Prince of Orange published a manifesto
declaring Belgium free, and offering himself as its head ;
but they declared it was already free, and therefore this coun-
try was no party to the severance. Again, if this country
was a party of the severance, equally so was the Emperor
of Russia.—(Cheers.) And if so, what right had he to
demand this payment?—(Cheers.) He would ask too,
what would be the consequence if England had not inter-
fered at all (as it did only to prevent the flames of war be-
ing kindled in a corner of Europe)? Surely they would
not have been bound at all, unless, indeed, they were to
accept the construction of the Noble Lord as to foreign vio-
lence, and take for granted that the meaning of the treaty
was something which it did not express—(Cheers)—and
was not to be found within it.—(Cheers.) He wondered
where the Noble Lord made it out : and even if he could
conclusively make it out, still the Noble Lord should have
come down to the House to state the true circumstances
which had arisen, and for which the treaty had not pro-
vided. Even supposing that the spirit of the treaty was
contrary to the letter—taking for granted that " quod
voluit non dixit," he should have demanded the sanction of
the House for interpreting it according to this spirit,
which was not expressed in any one word of the treaty.
Mr. HORNE objected to considering the Act of Par-
liament otherwise than as connected with the treaty, or to
any reference to the law of the land. The only law to be
NLct
colonies,o,
ota:.
rsoad v
Loe
rfi
av'etbtnedhrytgipttoi was the law of nations, or, in other words,
public faith.
%;:vooellfpl
tTeelretresthoai
onelt
dy4hsßi..eodi
fegErslTl
ed
he:1:131:n:end:
that
eiwrGnaeocataefostninLiit
(nlolooeilrpfnti
Lord Castlereagh
olansisnsdciail
possession
should
(eun,tecri
l(leodioyeanrdgbtaaehetinrol
con-
sidereded
andi
pe de
r
r
all
Iler
b.ii,..nnaiecaerselwteA,liyeenitope(rilseoeauxmivttiyhee.rs‘ile,a. exceptingraand
E sosen(liyu
itbhoe. CapeA And
dof Good
considering Hope,
t
politically advantageous to retain these, England consented
of a
to grant a payment of money to Holland as a compensa-
ahsTsiosltoatuitile,d)dselteltt
ttartekliewinse%srvehiotchtedr:ltia,eibnetsrutehapeteyrs.zumb,jißeice:
that supplementary treaty, England engaged to leave three
millions of money at the absolute disposal of Holland, and
no qualification was made as to the mode of payment. The
obligation of payment was enforced, but the mode of pay-
ment was not stated. But in the treaty of 1815, it was
origintended that Holland and Russia should be the
parties ; for what said the preamble--
His Majesty the King of the Netherlands being desirous,
upon the final re-union of the Belgic provinces with Holland, to
render the Allied Powers who were parties to the treaty con-
cluded at Chaumont on the Ist of March, 1814, a suitable return
for the heavy expence incurred by them in delivering the said
territories from the power of the enemy; and the said Powers
'laving, in consideration of arrangements made with each other,
mutually agreed to waive their several pretensions under this
head in favour of his Majesty the Emperor of All the Russias ;
his said Majesty the King of the Netherlands has thereupon re-
solved to proceed immediately to execute with his Imperial
Majesty a Convention to the following effect, to which his
Britannic Majesty agrees to be a party in pursuance of engage-
ments taken by his said Majesty with the King of the Nether-
lands, in a Convention signed at London on the 13th day of
August, 1814."
The great Powers, it appeared, considered they had a de-
mand upon Holland for the sacrifices made by them dur-
ing the war; but Russia, through the house of Hope, was
at the time indebted to Holland in the snot of fifty millions

of florins. So strong was the obligation imposed on the
contracting parties by this treaty, that even war was not
to put an end to that obligation or suspend it. War, he
repeated, which was the highest prerogative of sovereign
power, was not to put an end to the treaty. They were
bound to look at the interest of the three parties, and the
treaty was so drawn, that even war between two of them
was not to put an end to the obligation. The parties
themselves then were most anxious to preserve the treaty.
All parties deprecated the dissolution of the united Govern.
ments. The argument was, that in respect to good faith,
to the structure of treaties, to the meaning of the parties,
the pecuniary obligation could not be put an end to. The
words " God forbid " showed how much the parties had
the matter at heart. It was said that the treaty was con-
firmed by an Act of Parliament, but what had the Em-
peror of Russia to do with our Acts of Parliament? He
might refer us to an Ukase, or the King of Holland might
refer us to an Act of the States-General, but neither of
them would think an Act of Parliament binding. Another
principle that had influenced his judgment was, that a
party could not take advantage of an act of his own to
throw off a pecuniary obligation. Now what had Eng-
land done? Had she not interfered ? She had assisted
r
family
etyota,actcoonttlisfhaetht,etsbeaptarnaatisoania.
miglthwa t
s fooliinterfere—that
relations and various other circumstances might induce her
foolish to shut
liut their
to interfere and prevent the separation ; and what had
prevented her interference but the interference of this
country? England had been accessary to the separation,
and it was not in good faith to say that a separation which
had been in a manner caused by herself, should have been
taken advantage of by her to avoid a pecuniary payment.
In his deliberate opinion, he saw no reason whatever to
exonerate this country from the obligations of the treaty,
and he had heard no argument, and he knew of none,
which could be urged, to justify the withholding of the
payments.—(Cheers.)

Mr. BARING and Sir EDWARD SUGDEN rose
together, but the call of the House was for the latter, who
went on to say that the finances of the country were in
such a state at present as to make this an important ques-
tion, and he hoped to obtain a patient hearing. The mere
sum in question was of considerable importance in the
present state of the finances of this country.—(Hear,
hear.) Formerly, indeed, we threw away millions and
tens of millions—(Cheers from both sides of the,House)—
as if we were spendthrifts, to whom money was of less
value than to other nations; but now the time was come
when it was the duty of that House, and if it were not
its disposition, the House would be forced, by the country,
to pay the utmost attention to public economy. He
agreed with the Noble Lord, whether the sum were five
millions or fifty millions, if the honour and credit of the
country were involved in it, if it were necessary to make
the payment, undoubtedly it ought to be made, though it
were infinitely more inconvenient than the payment was
likely to be. He should give up the question if the
country was under the engagement to pay; but that
was the question which was open to discussion.—
With great deference to the Learned Gentleman, he
must say, that it added very little to the distinct,
plain, and honest statement, which, with his usual
candour, the Noble Lord had made on the ques-
tion. He would make no apology for following his
Majesty's Solicitor-General, as he did not think this a
law question. It was a question that every man, who
understood plain English, could decide; and he should
think it a question not to be referred to the King's
Bench, but rather to the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs. But as the Government had rested its decision
' on the arguments of the Learned Gentleman, he should
consider a few of them. The question before the House
was, the engagement not being denied, divided into two
parts. First, were we bound to countenance the payment?
If we were not legally and strictly bound, were we not
bound by equity and honour in the same manner as an
honest man was bound to pay the debts he contracted ?
The second question was, whether the Ministers had
authority under the law to make the payment? and if they
ha,' not authority, and the payment were due in equity,
whether they should not have come down to Parliament
to ask for authority ? These were two distinct questions,
whether the Government had authority, and whether the
obligation had ceased ? If he saw in the representations
which had been made any equitable claims on the part
of Russia, be should be wrong to say that those claims
ought not to be paid; but Russia must be told,
before they could be paid, that the Government must
have the sanction of an Act of Parliament. The Hon. and
Learned Solicitor General said that the Russian Govern-
ment knew of Ukases, but that it knew nothing of Acts
of Parliament.—(Cheers.) But in that very treaty the
King of the Netherlands prothised to pay ; while the
King of Great Britain does not promise to pay--he only
promises to propose the ►natter to Parliament.—(Cheers,)'
If the country were bound, it was not by an Ukase, but
by Act of Parliament ; and the treaty of 1811 did not
pretend that the obligations could be carried into effect
without the authority of Parliament. Russia knew then
th at something must be proposed to Parliament and sanc-
tioned by it. He complained that Ministers had lost them.
selves, and should have applied to Parliament, and by not
doing so, they acted more like the servants of a despotic So.
ve.eign than the Minister of the King of England. The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman said that the treaty referred
to former treaties, by which we were to keep certain
colonies. That was true, and it was provided, in conse-
quence of our retaining those colonies, that we should
give one million to Sweden, two millions to Holland for
the fortresses of the Netherlands, and a sum to be after-
wards regulated, which the lion. and Learned Gen-
tleman said was three millions : that he must deny.
The sum was not to exceed three millions, but it was not
intended to amount to so much, and if it were, how came
the Emperor of Russia to content himself with less
than that sum ? If Ministers had come down
and said that the King of Holland had lost his Belgian pro-
vinces, as well as the Cape of Good Hope, and, come-
quently had received no reciprocal advantages for the
lass of his colonies, and had, therefore, proposed to continue
the payment, he would have understood that argument.
But it was Holland which had lost her colonies. The
King of Holland had loss his Belgic provinces, and the
Ministers proposed to continue the payments, not to Hol-
land, but Russia. If it were a debt of money he should
think nothing more sacred than such an obligation, but the
words of the treaty were so precise and clear that it was
impossible to misunderstand them. The treaty said that
the payments " should cease and determine should the
possession and sovereignty, which God forbid, of the
Belgic provinces at any time pass or be severed from the
dominions of his Majesty the King of the Netherlands."
The only question was, had the separation taken place ?
As a lawyer, he was surprised that the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman should have given such an opinion.
That the Noble Lord should say that circumstances
had entered into the consideration, he was not sur-
prised; but that the law officers of the Crown should
have given an opinion on politica and law did sur-
prise him. They might be sure that the question
would be put by their constituents, and at the
foot of the hustings—why should they vote five millions
to the Emperor of Russia? and he was sure that if sonic
other interpretation could not be put upon this treaty
than that of the plain meaning of the English language,
gentlemen would not be able to satisfy their constituents.
They could only answer that his Majesty's Law Officers
understood the English language differently from the vul-
gar, and they had decided that this treaty imposed the ob-
ligation to pay.—(Cheers.) Common sense would not,
however, so interpret it. The Noble Lord had referred to
circumstances, and if circumstances justified the payments
that was a ground fur a new Act of Parliament; but he
denied that circumstances did bind the country to make
the payments. If it was a question of justice, to be
settled by a reference only to Holland and Russia, he might
look upon it in a different light ; but he denied that it was
such a question. The words were explicit. " if the Bel-
gic provinces shall pass or be severed ?" Why, diplomacy
could not use more binding words. If any other condition
were meant, would it not be expressed ? lie was sure
that the diplomatists knew language well enough to have
expressed any other condition, if they had meant to im-
pose any other. But there was no other condition ex-
pressed or implied than that of the separation, on which
the payments depended.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The
flonourahe and Learned Gentleman had dwelt much
on the circumstance, that even war was not to sus-
pend the payments. That no doubt, proved the great
caution of the parties ; but the words " God forbid" were
words commonly used, and implied nothing particular.
He could not suppose that the possibility of the separation
of the United Provinces, from other causes than war, had
not been contemplated i❑ 1814 and 1815. When the
two nations were united, they were known to be hostile.
It was felt to be a haz irdous experiment, at which men
trembled. It was not possible to suppose that the diplo-
matists only contemplated a separation by war or external
force. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman laid it down
that we had caused the separation ; but if we had done so,
and not the Belgians, that was a still stronger ground
d
shoe
uld
quite
efi
odasrnub)ire,mehrpt:telhliailfevtid:nalb before
rfiso:trin:eoi
stronger
leai
)(ilags,ytreiotirsu,s'eh,nny,
ift.thrii et.
than this
Koctuiiiiiiniedsge
be
payments.—(Cheers.)
uf)dhili4Hituoi:ol
distinctls
y
brought aid
brought home to them, which he was sure it could not,
that they had caused the separation by disturbance and
agitation. That argument might do for Lincoln's Inn,
but it would never do for Downing-street. It would be a

great political crime, and would deserve i►npeachnment. If
we had any interest on the Continent, we bad a strong in-
terest in the mouths of the Scheldt and the Tagus.—
(Lund cheers.) In those parts we had a great national
interest. If we had placed Belgium under the power
of France, and that it was as dependent on the power
o France as much as if it were under its Government,
it was doing a great wrong. Ile admitted that the Belgic
question was of serious difficulty, and that the result was
riot satisfactory. But he was not going to argue that, or
call on the Belgic question ; but lie was surprised to hear
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman say that we had been
parties to turning out the King of the Netherlands. If
the Hon. and Learned Gentlema❑ would turn to the prior
trsiaty, he would see the grounds on which the condition
was entered into. He would see that Russia stated that
it was bound to its creditors, which was a very good rea-
son for promising to pay ; but the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman wanted to impose on us the same conditions
ai Russia was subject to in relation to her creditors. Cer-
tainly, those creditors were not to suffer by any war ire
which Russia should engage; and such a condition was
made invariably when a State borrowed money. The
question seemed to him so clear, that as respected himself
—and he should be ashamed of himself, if on a question of
that nature, he could suffer any political feelings to bias his
judgment, though be had ❑o political feelings toward the
Noble Lord opposite—but he must say, that neither good
faith towards Russia, nor any other reason that he had
heard, justified the payment. If the treaty was at
in end the Government should renew it, and before
continuing the payments it was urgent that it should
have a new Act of Parliament. Unless some better
reasons were given than he had yet heard, he should
he of opinion that an Act was necessary. If the House
did not insist on that, it would abandon all controul over
the Government, and enable the Government of the pre-
.ent day to do what the Government of 1814 was not
,llowed to do without the consent of Parliament. He was
surprised that the Hon. Gentlemen eq the other side, who
had generally shown themselves so tender in preserving
or that House the controul over the public money, and
'Oro insisted so much on responsibility, should have taken
the view they had of the treaty. He hoped that gentle-
men would use their own understandings. As yet no ar-
guments bad been offered to justify the conduct of Mi-
nisters. With respect to the resolutions of the Right
Hon. Gentleman, to them he made no objection. if any
other mode less censurable for the Government could
be adopted,—if any more satisfactory method could be
found of settling the question, he should have no objection.
But if the Government persisted in its course--if it would
oot come to Parliament, there was no other way but to
vote for the resolutions. Hon. Gentlemen should re-
member that if they had this year—if they now gave the
sanction of Parliament to the payment, it would not be
possible, without injustice, to withhold the payment next
year. lion. Gentlemen ought also to remember that they
would be called to account by their constituents in Octob,•r.
He thought the House was bound to pass the resolutions,
slid rote against the Government.—(Cheers.)
Mr. S. RICE complained of the allusions made by the
Hon. Member to the hustings. The Hon. Member said,
chat the question ought to be decided only by justice; and
w•hy then use arguments that appealed to the passions, and
were calculated to rouse other feelings than a respect for
justice. The Hon. Member had argued the question as a
,artisan, and with a view to entrap a few votes.—(No,
no, and cheers.) He would, however, refer to the facts
of the case as far as the Treasury were concerned. It was
n the month of June that the attention of the Treasury
was first called to the subject ; and before it made any
payments, it had taken the opinion of the Law Officers of
the Crown, arid before actually paying the money, it had
admitted the drafts on the Exchequer to the auditors, anti
',tained their signature. It was in October that the first
doubts had arisen in the Exchequer as to the legality of
the payments, and whether they ought to be made. A
letter was subsequently addressed by the auditors of the
Exchequer to the Treasury, requesting two things. The
first was, that the Treasury should furnish the auditors
with the opinions of the L►w Officers of the Crown ; and
the second was, that the Treasury should give the audi-
tors special instructions for their guidance. The Trea-
sury did send to the auditors the opinion of the
Law Officers of the Crown. He might be asked what
case had been submitted to the Law Officers of the
Crown; for he knew that it was customary in that
House to say, that their opinion would depend on the
c ise submitted to them. Perhaps no better case could
have been submitted to them than that drawn up by the
auditors themselves. The day after the letter was re-
ceived, a case was submitted to the Law Officers of the
Crown. The letter, he should observe, was dated Ja.
nuary 11, and some delay was experienced in getting an
opinion on the case, owing to the absence of the Law Offi-
aers of the Crown on the Special Comtnissio❑ at Bristol.
It was not till the 24th of January that the opinion was
given, and that opinion was immediately forwarded to
Lord Grenville. With reference to the request for special
instructions, the Treasury (we understood the Right Hon.
Gentleman to say) did not interfere, or give any other
than the ordinary instructions to the auditors. The first
letter to which he had referred was dated January 3, and
which he would read. The Right lion. Member accord-
ingly read the following lettera—
.

_
" Auditor's-office, Exchequer-office, Jan. 3, Ifo2.
" My Lords,—Some doubts having occurred in this office re-
specting the legality of any issue which might henceforth be di-
rected by your Lordships to be made (ruin the Exchequer for
any fresh payment of dividends on the Russian loan, by virtue
of the Act 55 Geo. 111. c. 115. I think it my duty herewith to
enclose a statement which has been there prepared of the
grounds of those doubts, such as they have been laid before me,
and 1 humbly request that your Lordships will be pleased to ob-
tain from the opinion of his Majesty's law servants whether,
under the circumstances there stated, I shall legally be justified
in executing, as far as depends upon me, any such direction ;
:111(1 that your Lordships will also be pleased, in a case so highly
important to the public faith and to the interests of the State, to
give me such special directions as you may judge fit for my con-
duct in any part of this business, in which it shall really appear
tint any legal direction rests with have the honour, &e.
GRENYILLE."
The Treasury minute which was made on the receipt
of this letter, was, he thought, immaterial. It merely
expressed the steps which were taken in consequence. The
Right Hon. Gentleman also, on being called on, quoted a
-hart passage of the statement which accompanied the letter.
It was material that the House should know that the case
submitted to the Law Officers of the Crown was that sent
by Lord Grenville. Surely that was plain dealing in the
Treasury, and it was doing its duty openly both to the
auditors and the public. The Government had ❑ot made
out a case to get an opinion suitable to its own views—it
had submitted the case to the Law Officers, which Lord
Grenville had sent to the Treasury accompanied by the
tr,-aty.—[An Hon. Member asked for the opinion of the
Law Officers of the Crown.] Did the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman ask for that ?

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL interrupted the Right
Hon. Gentleman, and denied that he had asked for the
opinion.

Mr. SPRING RICE was glad to hear that, for he
knew from the often-repeated opinions of the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman that he should be supported by his
,iuthority in refusing that opinion to the Hon. Member
who asked for it. The House did not require to have the
opinions of the Law Officers of the Crown, for his Hon.
,ind Learned Friends were there, the living witnesses to
the opinion they had given to Government.—(Hear.)
It was only on that morning that he had receieed the let-
ter from Lord Grenville, which he would then read to
the House. The Right Hon. Gentleman reed the follow-
ing letter :...

" Exchequer, Jan. 25, 15,12.
" Sir,-1 have had the honour to receive your letter of yester-
day's date with its inclosure, and I request that you will lay be-
fore the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury my respectful
thanks for the information which they have been pleased to
supply to me on this important matter.
" The statute, 55 Geo. 111., c. 115, is the document on which
the question must turn, as far as relates to my conduct. That is
the authority to which I am bound to conform myself. But I am
fully satisfied that its true construction depends (as his Majesty's
law servants have stated) on that of the treaty which it recites,
and for the execution of which it was made. N'N'here, then, must
that construction be determined ! The officers of the Exchr,
quer cannot interpret the King's engagement with his Allies, Or
pronounce how they are affected by subsequent events and nego-
ciations. We have here no knowledge of the facts, no cogni-
zance of the principles whicb govern such decisions. All that
is officially known to me on the subject is, that the legal and
political authorities to whom the consideration of these high
matters properly belongs, have advised his Majesty to consider
himself as still bound, in maintenance of the national good faith,
to continue their payments ; and as far as my humble judgment
extends, I trust 1 cannot err in determining, under these cir-
cumstances, to discharge my own more limited duty, in obeying,
as before, their Lordships' orders in this behalf.
(Signed) .1 GRENVILLE.

" Thomas Spring Rice."
(The reading of this letter was frequently interrupted by
the sheers of the Opposition.) There were papers whirls
he could refer to that would prove that the Treasury had
frequently interfered with the exercise of the duties of the
Auditor, although the Auditor was hound, in the exercise
•.f his duty, and the express words of the Act of Parlia-
ment. When Lord Grenville came at first to the consi-
deration of the question, he felt that be was bound to look
purely at the law as he found it laid down in the Act of
Parliament; but he afterwards saw the necessity and the
propriety of looking at the Act in connection with the
-pirit and meaning of that treaty with which it was con-
nected, and which it was intended to carry into effect.
ft such proved to be the opinion of the impartial illembers
of that House, and he had nu doubt it would be co, then
!ie would say they were bound to vote with the Govern-
,nent in opposition to the Right Hon. Gentleman's reso-

'titian.
Mr. HUME hoped the House would bear with him for
a few moments, while he attempted to justify to his cuu-