The Sun.
London, England, 1835-06-25 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, JUNE 25, 1835.

the French infantry had failed; and how could it be expected
that the band now raising in this country could without dis-
cipline succeed ? His Hon. and Gallant Friend was well
aware of the accidents to which the service in the Spanish Pe-
ninsula were exposed, and that it required the very best state
of discipline to conduct a war in that country. There required
strategy and tactic to act upon—a knowledge of the country
was necessary, and, above all, he ( Sir John Elley) would ad-
vise his Hon. and Gallant Friend never to leave this country
until he had secured in his military chest that amount of money
which would defray the expenditure of the army for at least six
months. He would advise his Hon. and Gallant Friend to
bear in mind that, whatever promises of succour the Spanish
Government might make, that succour would never reach
him. He ( Sir John Elley) had served in Spain, and had an
opportunity of becoming tolerably well acquainted with the
disposition of the Spanish people. He knew that they would
promise every thing; and he was equally certain they would
perform nothing.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) He had known
them to send intelligence to the army at one moment, and con-
tradict it the next ; and he well remembered on one occasion,
orders reached the British army from Madrid, desiring it to
hold its ground, when, at the same moment, the enemy had
been two days in Madrid.—( Hear, hear.) If the British army
had been exposed to these difficulties, what was to be expected
from hastily raised and undisciplined troops ? What were the
operations which his Hon. and Gallant Friend had to under-
take ? What was the definite object he had in view ? These
queries ought all to be answered and made known, because he
was convinced that eventually this country would be the pay-
master of these auxiliary forces.—( Hear, hear.) In conclu-
sion he would again entreat his Hon and Gallant Friend not to
stir from this country without the " sinews of war" being first
afforded and secured to him.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh. )
Mr. M‘LE AN rose amidst loud cries of " Question." The
Hon. Member rose for the purpose of putting a question to
the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Palmerston). Without further
troubling the House, he begged to inquire from the Noble
Lord at the head of the Foreign Department, whether the
Northern Powers of Europe had not withdrawn their Ambas-
sadors from Madrid, and whether any Italian Powers bad re-
cognized the Queen of Spain's authority?
Lord PALMERSTON believed it was generally known
that Austria, Prussia, and Russia had not at present any Re-
presentatives at Madrid, and also that the King of Naples had
protested against any change in the order of succession to the
Throne of Spain.
The SPEAKER felt it his duty to state, that what passed
in the early part of the debate between the Noble Lord and the
gallant member for Westminster had left, as he understood,
an unsatisfactory impression on the mind of the Noble Lord.
He understood the Noble Lord to have admitted that while
the motives of the gallant officer and his associates were truly
honourable, yet that, as a Member of Parliament, he could not
approve the course they were pursuing, even though their mo-
tives were honourable. The gallant officer not having correctly
understood the argument of the Noble Lord, had repelled the
imputation in strong language. After an explanation from
the Noble Lord he put the case hypothetically, and although
he reiterated his hypothetical case, it was merely for the pur.
pose of vindicating himself from the charge of having been
out of order, and not with any view of giving offence to the
Noble Lord. If the House concurred in the accuracy of this
statement, he hoped that the Noble Lord would feel satisfied,
and that both parties would express their satisfaction, and thus
put an end to all unpleasant feeling.
After a silence of some moments' duration, during which
neither Lord MAHON nor Colonel EVENS manifested any dis-
position to rise,—
Sir H. HARDINGE said, that though he was not in
Howe at the time his Noble Friend ( Lord Mahon) had
used some expressions which it would seem had given of-
fence to the Hon. and Gallant Member for Westminster, he
( Sir H. Hardinge) had heard the Hon. and Gallant officer's
reply. Now, though he had only heard one part or side of the
question, it appeared to him from what he had heard from
the chair, that there ought to be no difficulty in the way of his
Noble Friend and the Hon. and Gallant Officer coming to a
satisfactory explanation.—(Hear.) He (Sir H. Hardinge)
shoald ever feel it his duty to do all in his power to conciliate in
such matters ; and he did think, after what had been stated,
that his Noble Friend ought to rise in his place, and to state
whether, under the circumstances explained to the House, he
was satisfied. He ( Sir H. Hardinge) was bound at the same
time to state, that sitting near his Noble Friend during the
discussion, he had collected from him that lie was not satis-
fied with the explanation then given by the Hon. and Gallant
Officer, and he therefore thought the interposition of the
Speaker had become necessary. In that opinion he was forti-
fied and confirmed by the silence of his Noble Friend, and his
refusal thereby conveyed to respond to the Chair. His Noble
Friend had asked his advice on the matter, but he ( Sir H.
Hardinge) had refused to afford it, because by doing so he
could the more consistently rise to perform that duty of ce.e i-
llation which he was now endeavouring to discharge. It ap-
peared that the Hon. and Gallant Officer had said that he re-
ceived the expressions which had fallen from the Noble Lord
with contempt and disgust, and that when the Speal,er had
called the Hon. and Gallant Officer to order, the Hon. and
Gallant Member repeated the assertion, putting the case,
however, hypothetically. Now, as he ( Sir H. Hardinge) had
collected from his Noble Friend (Lord Mahon) he understood
his Noble Friend as consid,Ting that the hypothetical reitera-
tion was but a repetition of the original grievance. The Hon.
and Gallant Officer, he thought, must see that his Noble
Friend had not intended anything disrespectful to the Hon.
and Gallant Officer or those under his command, and that his
Noble Friend in styling the troops as mercenaries, had merely
assumed the general impression that troops not employed in
the actual service of the country might fairly, and without
casting a dishonourable imputation, be stated to be mercena-
ries. He therefore did entertain the hope that, after what had
passed, both parties would satisfactorily terminate the matter
here.—( Hear. )
Mr. O'CONNELL had certainly understood the Hon. and
Gallant Member for Westminster to have put the case hypo-
thetically in the first instance.
Mr. GOULBURN made an observation across the table,
which was wholly inaudible.
Mr. WARD had also understood the Hon. and Gallant
Member to have used the expression hypothetically in the first
instance.

Mr. F. FRENCH (we believe) was understood to express
a similar opinion, and added, that after the explanation from
the Chair, there could not be a doubt as to the propriety of
terminating the matter here.
Major BE AUCLERK was quite sure the Hon. and Gal-
lant Member for Westminster had misunderstood the Noble
Lord, and he was equally sure his Gallant Friend would act
with that generosity which was his characteristic.
Sir E. KERRISON said, that as he still saw no disposition
on the part of the Hon. and Gallant Colonel to explain that
which he ( Sir E. Kerrison) should consider an insult, he
should act in the same way as the Noble Lord had done.
However, after the able manner in which the whole matter
had been explained by the Speaker, he did hope that it would
be now ended by an amicable arrangement. —( Hear.)
Mr. H. BULWER said that every body who knew the
Noble Lord must be aware that he would not intentionally
say any thing personally offensive to his Hon. and Gallant
Friend, or those who served under him. The Noble Lord
had already disclaimed any such intention, and he was sure the
Noble Lord would not hesitate now to repeat such his dis-
claimer.
Major FANCOURT said that the Hon. and Gallant Mem-
ber for Westminster could easily state whether or not he had
put the case hypothetically.
After a few words from Mr. FINN, which did not reach us,
Colonel L. HAY said, that after the explanation which had
been given, the case ought to be considered as having been
put hypothetically, and the House therefore had a right to
expect an expression of satisfaction from both parties.
Lord MAHON (after repeated calls upon the Noble Lord)
said—l have nothing to add to the explanation which I before
gave ; it is before the House, and has been rightly construed
by the Right Hon. Gentleman in the Chair. I have, how-
ever, yet to learn whether the Hon. and Gallant Member used
those expressions in the sense I conceived them, or in the
sense in which others have construed them.
Colonel E VANS.—The House will clearly see, from the
terms used by the Noble Lord, that he exonerates me from any
thing dishonourable ; yet there has been some confusion of
expressions used by the Noble Lord, which led me to appre-
hend that the Noble Lord still attributed dishonourable mo-
tives to the officers about to serve under me. The Houle
will also see that I cannot understand any distinction between
those individuals and myself, and I am bound to repudiate
any disrespect manifested towards them. If lam to under-
stand that no unworthy motives are attributed to them or to
me, I can have no hesitation in saying that I do not wish to
injure the feelings of the Noble Lord in the slightest degree.
Lord MAHON--If I understand the Hon. and Gallant
Officer does not apply to me the words "contempt and dis-
gust," I have no hesitation in saying that I am satisfied.—
( Hear, hear.)
Colonel EVANS—As I understand the Noble Lord does
not impute dishonourable motives to me, and those with whom
I am associated, I can have no hesitation in saving that I am
satisfied.—( Hear, hear.)
The motion was then put and agreed to.
Lord MAHON, in postponing the order of the day for a
Committee of the whole House on the Agra Government Bill
until the next Supply day, said that the feeling which had been
expressed on all sides during the discussion which had just
terminated, ought to satisfy the Government of the necessity
of recommending to the Government of Spain not to take
away the privileges of the Basque provinces.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the motion of the Noble
Lord had been given way to on account of the urgency of its
nature, but he hoped the understanding with respect to the
Municipal Corporations Bill would be adhered to, and that
no opposition would be offered to now going into Committee
on that Bill.
Sir W. FOLLETT said that the next clause for discus-
sion was the one upon which his Hon. Friend, the Member for
Somerset, had given notice of an amendment. His Hon.
Friend not expecting the Bill would come on to- night was
not in his place, and he ( Sir W. Follett) objected to the clause
being proceeded with in his Hon. Friend's absence.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that he had a new clause to sub-
stitute (as we understood) which would make the amendment
of the Hon. Member for Somerset unnecessary.
An HON. MEMBER wished to know from the Noble Lord
whether, under this Bill, persons now serving apprenticeships
would have all the privileges reserved to them which were
confirmed by the Reform Act.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the 10th clause referred
to the pecuniary rights and privileges of freemen, and those
rights and privileges would be given to all persons now serv-
ing apprenticeship.
An HON. MEMBER inquired whether the Noble Lord would
extend it to persons who should be bound apprentice before
the Bill passed into law,
Lord J. RUSSELL replied in the negative, and added that

meant to extend the clause to those now actually ;truing thf‘ir

apprenticeships.
Mr. H. HUGHES wished to know whether the sons of

Freemen would not be placed in the same situation as appren-
Lices?

Mr. S. RICE interposed and remarked, that all these in-
quirieswould come on regularly in Committee, and it was in-

Convenient to discuss them now.

Sir W. FOLLETT was very desirous of knowing the
full extent to which the Noble Lord intended to go in the
10th chuse. If the Noble Lord meant to preserve all in-
choate rights, he should not desire any postponement of the
clause. _ _

After a few words from Mr. BONHAM CARTER and Mr.
ROBINSON, which did not reach us,
Mr. C. BULLER rose to presnt a petition from the city
of Canterbury, against certain provisions of the Municipal
Corporations' Bill, but
The SPEAKER called the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
to order.

Mr. KEARSLEY gave notice that he should to-morrow
move, that the individuals committed by the House, and now
in custody in Newgate, be brought up' for judgment.—(A

laugh.) y
Sir W. FOLLETT again repeated his hope that the
Noble Lord would defer the consideration of the 10th clau,e
of the Bill.
After a few words from Mr. HUGHIS HUGHES, the order of
the day was read, and the House went into Committee on the