Star.
London, England, 1815-03-11 00:00:00

•
merely met them m public plata to talk to dill*,
tod deliver ful ()Pinions upon sobjeetv that they did
lot understand. In this instance he would give his
firmest applawo_ to' his Majesty's Ministers for the
forts they 113 d made; and if he could at all dissent
torn their good, humane, and constitutional conduct,
w 'night be inclined to argue that they had carried
lAr humanity too far.—(Bear, hear.) if his house
aj been attacked, he would instantly procure such
nen, would place them in ambush, and defend it to
,he utmost, regardless of the opinion of the Honour-
,l,lc Bitonet or any of his Westminster constituents.
4: vr,utld take his full share of unpopularity for any
;‘,,tent that might happen on such an occasion, and
wad only say, for the information of the Hon. Ba.
cad and his constituents, that he would defend his
;of! :Is long as ever lie soul.(.

Sir FRANCIS BURDE. VT—lt is not my wish
o trouble the House at any length, more patticu-
Ay upon what has been said regarding myself per.
.noly. I am desirous, i.owever,. to set myself right
: :CI the Right Hon. Gentlemae. apposite (Mr. Ro-
; I did not attach any blame to him indivi-
hilly, bat to the soldiers who were employed. I do
(61ect to any nue who defends his house or his
3iflper: y, provided it be •done legally and constitu-
i should like to see every man to the me.
rep lie armed and orgagiled to preserve tranquil-
.:y—btit I du object to :the interferen4 of the
..hliers, by which a military despetism, instead of a
estitutional defence, would be established. An
l'.-nourable Baronet (Sir J. Sebright), obierved, that
A police Magistrate had !Teen placed .at the head of
noops, but duet this render the ,force at_ all hiss
c;itary or alter their character ? it• reminds me of a
e pry 1 have heard regarding one of the Westminster
Jections some years ago. The partisans of the dif-
-I..!ent candidates were organized Lite small bodies,
.:mad with half-poles, the size of a constable's staff,
with which they wci e able to do great execution, and
$ )ffletimes even, I beliese, committed murders. They
ee.:e under leaders who conducted them about the
town, one of whom one day asked whether it would
bet be better to have a little law on their side ? His
wen .ltd not understand, and he proceeded to ex-
plain that what made a legal constable was a painted
staff, and he asked them whether it would not be
te:ter to have their half-poles painted like them ?
S., it is with the other side, who defend the intro.
ihiction of the soldiery, by putting a Police Magi-
strate at their head, arguing by that means its mili-
tary character was changed. Thus, it is, that all
constitutional modes of defence are neglected and fall
into disuse. (No, no, no) Gentlemen may cry No,
no, no, if they please, but are they ignorant that,
ctnstitutionally speaking, such a thing es a standing
siedier is unknown in this country ? What then was
the proper and effectual mode of suppressing riots be.
Lee our army . was employed against the people ?
My object, therefore, is nut, as the Noble Lord is
pleased to represent it, to overturn, but to restore the
Cxnstitution Let the House recellect wbo it is that
century to make this charge against me. Who says
wish to overturn .the Constitution ? Why, the
Noble Lord ahoy was himself detected in an act for
which he ought to have lost his head. (Hear, hear,
ad rex onfasion.) I say, that for that act the Noble
Lordroaglit to have lost his head ; and by an uncor-
tupt liouir.it Commons he would have been im-
peached,.an.laieouldhave suffered. He was exposed
traitickiqg in seat's in this House. The Noble Lord,
anJ his friends. round %in's, isush ; .ho may laugh
Lev' secure in the protection he has received from
en House ; but when. this heinous traffic was disco.
teted,.you youirelf, Mr. Speaker,. stigniatized it as a
raw practice, at which our fOrefathers would have
eated , with horror aod fodignation, and yet the
k,l;.e Loi,d waipaidiOnea, let it never be forgotten,
lecauseitie,erime was as notorious as the sun at noon-
eay, and IRescaped. in the general mass of corrup-
t= and- delinquency. Yet the
.Noble Lord, ad.
tuitted to be guilty of this great offence, this direct
attack upon the Constitution, now ventures to stand
terward amidst the applauses of the House,
as the uphol ier and supporter; of that Cieistitti-
ton which he is .proved to have endeavoured to
evertheow. (Hear, hear, /bear, aid great con(urion.)—
I cannot approve of the public tumults, the breaking
of windows, or of the unmanly. practice of attacking
defenceless individuals, but still less do I approve of
t r snore unmanly practice of letting loose an armed
l.•ce upon an unarmed populace.—(Hear,
Int I can bear with patience the charge of the Noble
Lord, that I wish to renovates the Constitution, be-
en* it has been. I am proud tee say, the whole ob-
i•tt of my lite. The Honourable Baronet has spokeo
ti! Electors oF Westminster as if they were en-
filed in these deaurbances: he says that lie will de-
Ed his house to the last apairiai my Constituents.—
ta•he.mean to assert that the enlightened Electors
'I the important City of Westminster are guilty of
Cese outrages ?—(Bear, hear, and lausker). I say,
t at no Member has a right to make such an asses.-
t..n, however obnoxious my Constituents may be to
corrupt portion of this House. I have a right to
it so-,-the Noble Lord was detected in disgrace-
;aectices-1:.! was taken in the fact, and ex use
'!' ~ses ; that was only one instance of a consistent
II oi profligacy.
.
.)? METHUEN spoke to order: the Honour-
lc Emmet was not warranted in asserting that the
Ll'irts.• was a consistent system of profligacy.—(Hear.)
The SPEAKER—The Honourable Baronet has
r:eti ling enough in the House to know that it is a
.4.76 or its orders to use such language.
>ir F..BURDETT--I do know it; and I wish
...11 snit orders were acted up to in the House I
• diataby assertion was rot only a breach of order
'la breach of truth—(Order, order).
H. SUMNER again spoke to order. He
to know whether the Honourable Baronet
(•:ed to have his words taken down t
iir F. BURD,F.TT—It is a matter of indiffer.
'''cr to nie-...the Honourable Member may do just
•••• pleases.
•41. JOHN SEBRlGHTexplained, that-he did
• r mean to cast any reflection upon the Electors of
L,tininster ; he only alluded to certain persons,
the Honourable Baronet was in the habit
:scing in Palace-yard.
F. BURDETT—The Honourable Baronet
7114 be informed that the Householders of West.
.''ter are the Electors. The Noble Lord has
n " d my arguments equivocal ; now I do not care
straw whether the measure is or is not carried.
"41 only sorry that Gentlemen:if the country have

intet s, 'staidthat gil6ple have been deluded
by it. He then brought up the PetitiOn,- which %vas
read and laid upon the table
nieroax OF BONAPARTE. •
' Mr. WHITBREAD rose to ask the Noble Lord.
whether he intended to lay the Convention entered
into between this country and the allied Powers, at
'Chaumont, on the table ? In July lag the Noble
Lord had promised that the Ratification, so met as
it was concluded% should be forthcoming. In No-
vember, during his absence, it was stated, that the
Ratification had not taken place, but that when the
House met in Febivary it would certainly be pre.
.duced. In February the Heim were again told it
was not ratified. He therefore wished to know whe-
ther it was probable that the House would be put in
possession of the Paper before Wednesday, as it was
necessary for the discussion which stood for that day ?
He would also take the liberty of asking whether a
piece of information which he had heard this day,
' and which was of the greatest importance, was true,'
namely, THE LANDING OF BONAPARTE IN THE SOUTH
OF FRANCE ?•-••( Loud cries of Hear, hear.)
Lord CASTLEREAGH replied, that therrcity
or Convention had been ratified on the part of the
three Powers interested, and would be laid before the
.House on a future day. With respect to the other
question, it MU true that Government had received
an official communication of the fact of the I ending
of Bonaparte in the South of France.—(Harr, hear.)
Mr. WHITBREAD hoped the Noble Lord
would lay the documents on the table before Wed-
nesday. The news which had just received the Noble
Lord's confirmation, was indeed a surprise ; he hoped
that Great Britain and the Allied Powers would
stand-immaculate in respect to their plighted faith.
Lord CASTLEREAGH was not inclined to re-
ply to the insinuations of the Hon. Gentleman. In
respect to the paper, if it was Ant laid on the table by
Wednesday, that would not embarrass the discussion,
as the thing was ratified, and consequently the Hon.
Gentleman could argue the same as if it was before
him. It was likely, however, that the paper might
be produced in its ratified form before then.

Mr. WHITBREAD observed, that the money
had been voted on the treaty, and the paper ought to
be before Parliament.

Mr. TIERNEY contended, that he had a right,
under these circumstances, to demand the production
of the paper, and the Noble Lord must produce it.
Lord CASTLEREAGH replied, that the sort of
language used by the Right Hon. Gentleman would
not lead to an earlier production—his Majesty's Mi.
nisters had received the confidence of Parliament and
the public, and his language would not divert them
from their duty.
Mr. WHITBREAD insisted that the paper must'
be produced. He was proceeding to discuss the ne-
cessity, when he was called to order. He then asked
if any money had been paid in conformity with the
stipulations of the treaty ?
Lord CASTLEREAGH replied, that no money
whatever had been paid. Gentlemen would there-
fore see the advantage of making Conventions. (4
laugh.) He hoped this intelligence would satisfy the
Hun. Gentleman.

Mr. WHITBREAD was sati:ficd. Intelligence
so agreeable could not come too soon.--[The i-lon.
Gentlemanhaving intimated his intention of proposing
an Address, withdrew it, on the mist!' Ance of the
Noble Lord that the Paper should be produced so
soon as convenient.]

1
a
1
1
a
ii
1