Star.
London, England, 1809-04-26 00:00:00

.
tiva dim be fantods. The Noble Lord had acknow-
ledged having placed a writersitip at the disposal of
the Earl of Clancarty, to facilitate his coming into
Parliament; and he could not think when one of the
fundamental principles of the Constitution were vio-
lated by a Minister, that they ought to pass on to the
Orders of the Day.
The CHANCELLOR of -the EXCHEQUER
said he should think he neglected every private duty
if% feeling as he did, he failed to rise, regardless of
whatever he might have to encounter, in behalf of
his valued friend. He did not Clink, when he enter-
ed the House that night, that there would h-..ve been
any doubt as to the facts or to the law applicable SO
them. In the former instance he had been disap.
pointed, but not in the latter. The Right' Honour.
able Gentleman then pointed out wherein the func-
tions of that Tribunal differed from those of Courts
of Law. He was happy to follow the Gentleman
who spoke last ; he joined with him in the candid ex-
position he had made; agreed with him as to the na-
tare of the offence; and the law for punishing it; only
differing as to the propriety of its being applied in
the present instance. He thought his Honourable
Friend (Mr. Croaker) had been reproved for vindi-
cating the character of the Marquis of Sligo, when he
did not want reproof ; and the Honourable Genii,-
man would have done well, had he considered, before
he adverted to the Union, the impropriety of Matit
ing the public mind by insinuations which were not
founded in fact. One of the charges preferred against
his friend and colleague was of such a nature that he
could not but reply to it in particular, as it did indeed
tend to aggravate his conduct in a very great degree.
He alluded to that part of the Noble Lord's speech,
where he spoke of the indignation of his N Ile Friend
as being affected. He was sure his indignation was
most sincere, and if the evidence was perused, he
thought that he was so must be obvious. He had never
seen Davis but once before the negociation was over.
—(Here the Right Honourable Gentleman slightly
glanced at the evidence.) A short time before the
Committee commenced its sitting, Davis wrote a let.
ter to him, stating that there was a case in which he
wished the Noble Lord to direct him what to do.--
The answer of his friend had been very different to
what Davis had expected—" You can do me no
greater personal favour than by stating all you know,
&c." His conduct in this instance proved that con-
scious of the rectitude of his intentions, he was desi-
rous the whole of the circumstances connected with
his conduct should be laid h:fote the Committee that
it might be-cleared up, he therefore thought the No-
ble Lord had no right to think his friend's indigna-
tion was insincere on the evidence of Davis. Nothing
had been said against the Noble Lord's conduct in a
moral point of view, and if the circumstances laid
before the House should cause them to come to an
unfavourable decision, whatever might be their sen i•
ments, he should still feel justified in his attachment
to the friend he loved. The resolution was neither
true in words nor facts ; there were inaccuracies of
great importance. Whatever error his friend might
have, committed, he hoped the House would be parti-
cularly guarded as to the manner in which they word-
ed the proposition. The first resolution he could not
agree to, .and the second, which stated that the ne-
gociation failed through the underlings, was equelly
incorrect. If the resolutions were passed at all they
must be amended. No reliance should be placed on the
evidence of Reding. Lord Sligo had no seat to sell ;
Sligo was a name he made use of before the Com-
mittee ; but which he probably never thought of be-
fore. The manifold absurdities, and contradictions in
that man's evidence, rendered it wholly useless. It
was evident the man meant to impose on the public,
by making use of the letter which his Noble Friend
had indiscree:ly written to him. The injurious effects
of offences he did not mean to deny It had been
said, that if disposing of East India Patronage were
regarded as such a venal error, the disposal of patro-
nage of every other description would cease to be re-
probated. No one, he believed, thought of justifying
an abuse ; from whatever source power might be
derived, the person holding it was responsible for the
use he made of it. It had been said the deprivation
of power would be an appropriate punishment ; bat
a removal under such circumstances would be deemed
as severe a punishment as he could have deserved, had
he been intentionally guilty, and the tregociation suc-
cessful. The guikof intention was all that had been
imputed to him, and of that the last speaker had ac-
quitted him, as the Right Honourable Gentleman
had said he did not believe, had.the Noble Lord seen
it in another point of view, that he would have con-
cerned himself with it. It had been compared to a
case of bribery ; he would ask the Gentleman who
made the comparison, if, in a case of bribery,, he
would proceed as he now proposed to do ? Should it
be proved before a Committee that two Sessions ago
a Member had unsuccessfully tried to gain a seat by
bribery, would he have that Member punished now as
if he had gained his seat by bribery ? His Noble
Friend had been acquitted of the guilt of intention,
yet still could they be called upon to pass sentence
with all the consequent punishment he had before
spoken of ? The trap that he had planned, arid which
the Noble Lord had alluded to, from the ample scope
it had been allowed, proved the integrity of his own
intentions. He did not think they would consult either
the feelings of their constituents, or their own dignity,
by singling out for such severe punishment a case to
which so many alleviating circumstances were at-
tached. He therefore proposed, that they should pass
to the Order of the Day, not .because that was cf any
importance, but because it appeared to him nothing
farther on this subject could be required.
Mr.,GRATTAN, in explanation, said, he did not
state it as his opinion that the Noble Lord was not
guilty, but that he believed he was not aware of the
extensive effects of such a transaction.

Mr. PONSONBY declared, that in what he had.
to observe on the present question, nothing was more
remote from his mind than any intention of hurting
the feelings of the Noble Viscount whose conduct was
the object of it ; what he wished more
draw the attention of the House to will
sion which the case of the Noble Viscox
on the face of the evidence before thi

likely to make upon the country. Aims',
should be aware how deeply it must
meter of the House of Commons, both
and the future, if such a transaction wa.

over not only without punishment, buk
ment of a Noble Lord would propose.

animadversion or notice. His conicienca

■

fib
particularly to
as, the impres-
)unt, as it s:ood
he House, was
e all,Gentlemen
affect the cha-
/.6‘l,afsort
ot he
bepassed present
It as the amend-
e, even without
F:nce and a sense