The Sun.
London, England, 1828-02-26 00:00:00

this, that he now professes to say what he did not say,
and to disavow what he did say, I consider the inference
to be of great importance; and as my name has been
brought forward in support of it, I feel it my duty to Mr.
Huskieson to declare, that on no occasion when I mentioned
that declaration, did I mention it as having been made in the,
manner in which it had been attempted to fix it upon him.
No precise form of expression could be given on my autho-
rity; I (lid not profess to give the precise words which he
used on that occasion; I confined myself to the substance,
and I cannot now pretend to rely upon the accuracy of
my recollection as to the words. So little attention
did I pay to the form of the expression, 1 cannot now re-
collect the words which I, in relating the circumstance, may
have used; and I cannot now say, in contradiction to the
statement which had been made by some friends of mine,
that I did not use the words attributed to me ; but if I
did use those words, I am bound to state that Kleave had a
subsequent opportunity of knowing that they were not the
words which he employed upon the occasion. I take no shame
to myself for avowing this inaccuracy in my recollection,
and I now beg leave to state to your Lordships that
Lord Granville showed me in Paris a letter written
by Mr. Lluskisaon to that Nobleman on the day after
the declaration took place, and while the words were
fresh upon his mind. In that letter he states to Lord
Granville what passed, and he does so in the same nom',
which he has lately avowed in another place.—(Loud
cheers.)—Those persons know'little of me who imagine
that by what I now state I wish to soften down
or qualify the sentiment which dictated that declaration
I speak as a private individual, and as such I nmst say,
that I would have found it difficult to have connected my-
self with those of Mr. Canning's colleagues, who had for-
merly separated from him. But I was, a private individual.
My Right Hon. Friend and his political friends in the
Cabinet were not, and I am of opinion, that those, my
Noble and my Right lion. Friends, being public men,
were hound to consider their public duties paramount to
private feelings, when an offer to retain their places was
made so them by the Noble Duke who was empowered to
form an Administration. I approve that. their considera-
tion of their public duties, and of the explanations received
by my Noble Friend at the bead of the Foreign Office, and
my Right Hon. Friend, the Colonial Secretary, be such as
that, on forming part of the Noble Duke's Administration,
they shall not be called on to abandon the principles on
which they acted under Mr. Canning's Government. Then,
I say, that I think it was their public duty not to withhold
their services from the Noble Duke—and that their
private duty also, as friends to the memory of Mr.
Canning, ought to dictate the same course to them
—after the Noble Duke's offer to them of retaining them
in their important and influential offices, connected with the
foreign policy, with the Colonies, and the Government of
Ireland, without requiring of them a compromise of their
principles. This offer of the Noble Duke I conceive to be
such a decided tribute of honour to the memory of my late
Right Honourable Friend, that I say they acted most
crrrect]y in not objecting to join the Noble Duke's Ad-
ministration. In fact, I see nothing in the conduct of the
Noble Duke or of my Noble Friend (Earl Dudley), or my
Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Huskisson), as set forth, in their
several explanations, but what is strictly honourable. As to
the alleged differences of opinion between the Noble Duke
and my late Right Hon. Friend, did not the Noble Duke
act with him many years in the same Administration—in
the time of Lord Liverpool—aye, and of the Duke of Port-
land, when my late Right Hon. Friend filled the office of
Foreign Secretary--and was not the Noble Duke more
immediately connected with, and a consenting party to,
his measures of foreign policy, under the Government
of Lord Liverpool ? As, however, the measures of my
Right Honourable Friend's foreign policy have been l
already discussed, I shall not, on this occasion, go
over them again, nor reply to those several commenta-
tors on them—whether to those who, approving his prin-
ciples of foreign policy, objected to the time and mode of
their application, or those who disapproved both his prin-
ciples and their practical operation—or to those persons
who approved both one and the other—or finally, to that
class of politicians, who declare they could never know
what were his principles of foreign policy—(A laugh)—to
these several persons I shall not now make an answer, but
briefly show the condition in which Mr. Canning left the
country at the time of his death. He left her in the pos-
session and exercise of that influence which, from her
power, she had a right to assume—he left her at the head
of the Councils of Europe—he left her when the eyes of
all the nations of the New World and the Old were
turned upon her, some with feelings of confidence, some
with gratitude, some with hope, and all with respect—
(Cheering.)—For the proof of this, I need only to refer
your Lordships to the sentiment of respect entertained
for my late Right Hon. Friend by the liberal and enlight-
ened of all countries, and the sensation of dismay and con-
sternation universally felt at his death ; an event which, in
foreign States as well as in Eugland, was lamented as a
national calamity. And that this my late Right Hon.
Friend's glorious course of foreign policy will be followed up
by his successor, we have a hope, and, indeed, a warrant,
in my Noble Friend's retention of the direction of the
foreign policy ofthe Empire, Then, as to the Right Hon.
Gentleman at the head of the Home Office, his sentiments,
and the manner in which he has expressed them, reflect
the greatest credit on his candour ; that Right Hon. Gen- '
tleman has declared, that there was not one measure of my
late Right Honourable Friend in which be did not concur,
with the exception of the Catholic Question ; that he never
met a public man with whom he acted as colleague in office
with greater pleasure ; nor one under whom, as leader ,
in the Commons, he was more willing to act, or as
Premier in the Administration, but for the Catholic Ques-
tion ; and the objection which he felt even on that point.
arose from the peculiar sort of auxiliary relation in which
he should stand as Home Secretary to a Prime 'Minister
favourable to Catholic Emancipation. As to any measures
intended by the late Government, or any dissensions or dis-
cussions that may have taken place in that Cabinet, I shall
make no ocservationo on them, as they are subjects with
which no person not a Member of that Cabinet ought
to interfere—no more, I say, thee, this, that lam sure they
involved no personal motive, no fundamental principle, of
a nature which would render it incompatible for my Noble
and Right Hon. Friends to act in concert with the Noble
Duke and his friends in the present Administration. Their
Lordships will remember the fact of Mr. Canning's offer of
office to the Noble Duke and the friends who retired with
him, coupled with his (my late Right lion. Friend's) assur-
ance that the Government should continue to be conducted
on the principle of Lord Liverpool's. Now, after this,
I can see no reason why the Noble Duke opposite rimy not
consistently make a similar offer to the friends of Ms.
Canning, nor why they should not as consistently accept'
it. As to any objectione arising from private feelings, I con.
Sider that my Right Hon. Friends ought to hold thm, elves
subordinate to their public duty, and I have no doubt that
in the main they will act on general measures with perfect
honcord with the Noble Duke and his friends. As to the
explanations lately given on matters that arose since the '
formation of the present Government, while some persons
are of opinion that somewhat more express pledges or sti-
pulations, or, es the phrase toss, guarantees, might to bsve

Mr.TIUME inquired why the petition was not refertcl
to the Standing Orders' Committee?

The SPEAKER explained, that under the perztliar
eumstances of the petition it could not be reSt.rred to th,
standing Orders' Committee, from the ennstitutian
that Committee.

Mr. HUME thought the Standiug Orders' Committee
were best qualified to judge of the contents of the petition
from their experience.

The SPEAKER said that all the Members of the Select
Committee were also Members of the Standing Orders'
Committee, with the, exception of Sir F. Burdett arii
Lord W. Russell.

IMPERIAL GAS COMPANY.
Mr. TYNES CLINTON brought up the report of the
Imperial Gas Committee.
Upon the question that it be read,
Mr. HUME complained that when the Imperial Ga.,:
Company was instituted, it was stipulated that a sum of
250,000/. should he subscribed as capital, and one-eighth of
the profits should ha invested in some of the public funds to
meet any claims on the Company. This condition was
made for the security of the public, and now, whea
the
Company made an application for a renewal of their
privileges, it was only fair to state to the pnblic,
that they had violated their contrail. They had sold
out the sum they had in the funds, and the pubiie
had no security. There were several of those Companies
in London who exercised conjointly a very important in-
fluence. The chartered Companies refused to let oat a
single burner under 41. a year, but the unprivileged Com-.
ponies let out a single burner at 50 per cent. less. This. Was
the effect to the public of those chartered Companies. lie
(Mr. Hume) knew nothing of the parties interested in this
Company, brit there had iwn a violation of the compact
made by the Company with the public. J-le therefore
proposed as an amendment, that the report Rionld be react
this day six months.

Mr. ROBINSON agreed with Mr. Hume that there
had been a gross violation of the contract made by the
Company with the puhlic. He found, too, that some of
the persons who were aiding and abetting in that foul
fraud, the Aligns. Mining Company, were also connected
with this Company, and the House should not sanclion
persons who proved themselves so uudeser‘iog of powers
of a similar kind.

InT•ohnegyhtlliiine
tchfenrsaC-rt
Mr. TYNES CLINTON said the. ill had been pit into
his hand in the absence of the Hon. Member, who formerly',
carried it through the House. He
gained
le
ia
nll
ey a krnaetillyernothtlalio,t,
it. He believed that the sum to be deposited as seNtrity
I had been misapplied as was stated ; but lie also believed
that by the present Bill t,,liceouDtietiitfobrsrotusi-ogii'litd
I keep within the terms of the law.
elibAceinTllMAN also oppmerlythe Bill.
Mr. CALCR.AFT said, that as the Company hail al-
j ready violated the contract they bad made with the public,
Ihe wonld not tempt them with the opportunity of viola n:
the law again. The Company hail
by the Bill being brought in by the lion. Gentleman, :Ir:.
not by the Gent I en n ssrbi on filet:
Gentleman was so mixed tip with those Companies, that
He said the Directors had withdrawn the money deposited
themßr.ill
Awloduelidinlainav
in the funds for the public security, y for the purpose of
persons concerned in other babbles, which were no hotte
blic frauds, and he therefore than public terefore thought the Bill ought
._
to be thrown out.
;Air.
• ATTWOOD f• 1
aii a few words which were Mandi
. gambling and trafficking
1 bip in the Gallery.
Mr. MABERLY said, that if they I
granted the praivi,:r
.
of the petition, they would be
public, by renderingabsolute a moinworpoeltsillaitrhthirgh4l tpaxlioend gas'
at a dearer rate than the public cpoid'd otherwisel obtain
it. He trusted the House would mark their sense of thz,
present attempt to injure the public by rejecting the Bill
at once.
After a few words from Mr. CLINTON, ,the gallery
was cleared for s division, when the numbers appeared t•,
be-- inliebcthiii,iigme,d t:

For Mr. Nome's Amendment
Against it
Majority
The Bill was therefore thrown out.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM presented petition_, from a
number of places in favour of the Wakefield and Ferry -
bridge Canal.
General GASCOYNE moved that leave be given to
introduce a Bill for the enlargement of the Docks at
Liverpool, notwithstanding that the Committee had re-
ported that the standing orders had not been complied with.
He did not mean to impute any thing to the Cm-

n;