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

in the present discussion: He -
- • ,urse, and hazard the corise-
..;ne had the misfortunetobe Men-
.• . • riled on thi s occasion Mar/tear ).
• ..;Low that all the circumstanceshad
• • - ed, to the feelings of any man whe-
• -,y motive or personal turpitude could
him? He did not wish to act in any
„:ning the dignity of Parliament : he
~tte his moti-res, and lrave it to that House
dtcision on them. He assured the House
it a moment had an idea that the appoint-
gift could lead to any corrupt influence,
,at House or in individual electors. Al-
individual who was to retire from Parlia-
lot been named, still the impression made
was, that he was not only a man of great
but that he was one of those in the
:log and acting in unison with Govern-
: thought him a man who had tsome favour
his son or nephew, and who never could
It such favour would operate to corrupt
lament or Elections ; indeed, he would be
n on earth to grant a favour which could
In effect. Even admitting (what he was
) deny) that the election system was cor-
se there were places where ministerial in-
property and personal respectability might
a return ; this, in his opinion, and in the
able men, ought not to be restrained, for
opportunity to meritorious characters, men
Ig and official distinction, who could not
lives to purposes of local agitation, to have
rewarded by the Crown and country.
1-.) It had been asked him, why did he
!ending his favour for the purpose of the
Lord Clancarty ? To this he might an-
he had never put the offer into practice ;
ren in cases of treason it required some
'o procure a conviction. But he would
ich answer : he would disdain to rely upon
!nee, but he would say, that taking all the
:es of the case together, no man in that
no Committee appointed by it, could de-
ich conduct virtually went so far to the
of a vote as to invalidate the election. The
not bear them out in saying so. As a Mi..
le Crown, he had no hesitation in saying,
ight he was in duty bound, in election cases,
is influence for the support of the Govern-
ich he belonged ; but he certainly did not
ice should stimulate him so far as to control
:on duct as to individual acts. The pre-
:Lion (as it had turned out) he could not
,y justify to the fulleA extent, but he would
moral corruption had been proved agaifist
ed if he had any corrupt views, this would
he case of all others in which he ought not
:J on them. It was a case which, from
;ore, precluded secrecy. If he intended
3tslionest or bate, this case of all others
ich he ought to avoid. This was as plain
ig he could say—as plain as that Lord
to seat in that House (Hear, hear!)—as
.t he had not seen Mr. Reding in Down-
ndeed it there were any case in the world
could positively prove an alibi, it would
was accused of filiging cards. (A laugh.);
a man in that House to believe, that if he
r-om any impure motive, this case would
it to the world ? He would not avail him-
.y just plea which he might make—name-
intention as to the disposal of the writer-
ally intention, and had never been acted on.
man could believe that there was any tur-
in the intention, he would disclaim such an
so far from any unjust or impure conclusion
, he had been even so prudent and careful
less, that he held it at his option after any
lion with Lord Clancarty, to alter his
letely. (Hear, hear !) It any thing tend-
ce suspicion arose—if any bad character of
is evinced—if two stories were told on the
reserved to himself the power of instantly
ff the negotiation ; but let any man for a
:fleet upon the probabilities in favour of his
ion. Can any man in his senses believe
ld be mad enough to sacrifice, thus wan-
purpose, his public character, his pro-
'e, his official situation, his respectability in
and in short evevy interest which could
's existence dear to him No, all that could
is, that he, by means which perhaps were
consonant to the usage of Parliament, but
tridoubtedly no corrupt motive could be
lad sought the advancement of his private
advancement of one too whom he knew
r proofs could prove ultimately beneficial
is service ! He had now gone as fully into
aances as the case, which was extremely
. its circuit, could admit : he had, to the
abilities, and certainly with candour; en-
to give the House a just view of the light
ought to be considered—he had tried to
ll the aggravations with which it had been
:d, and he would now rely upon their de-
Le would leave it to them to consider whe-
ut any motive, he would be wilfully cor-
tether his senses could so forsake him as to
Arne, Nthich, from the very circumstances
ted it, he knew must become public. He
fly to u egret that motives of private friend-
eablic zeal could have inthiced him to any
tg the cognizance of that House. He cer-
not erred intentionally, and would submit
!cc to any censure which he might be
have incurred.
ale Lord haying concluded his speech, made
:e to the bpraker, and withdrew.
HAMILTON then moved to the follow-

appears to this House that Lord Viscount Castle-
year 1803, baying just quitted the Presidency of
Contronl, and being at the time a Privy Councillor
11,1a;esty's Secretath s of State, did deliver up, into
Lor Clancarty, ali ritership, of which he bad the
impose of exchanging it for a Seat in Parliament.
•ely front thd disagreement of some subordinate
'id, ti:is design WaS not carried into effect.
I conduct was a dereliction of his duty as President
if Cortroul, a gross violation of his engagements as
the Crown, and an attack on the purity and consti-
House."
i\ NiNG lamented that the Noble Lord,
many years served the public, should be
to defend himself from charges, which
tated lo frustrate his whole object in life,
id lin into retirement with feelings the

most waundeditnd palatal. The Noble 'Lord had
not defended himself upon principle, nor should the
Noble Speaker attempt to do so ' • for, conscientious-
ly, he regretted to say, he could not do it. The
Noble Speaker was afraid of weakening the impres-
sion, which be trusted the Noble Lord had made by
going at any length into the case ;.but he should very
briefly refer to it. tThe Noble Speaker then went
through it, commenting upon the Noble Lord's (A.
Hamilton) inferences from it.)- This case, Lord
Binning contended, was attended with no circum-
stances of aggravation. The name of Lord Clan-
carty was known throughout the affair; and the Wri-
tership was not at his disposal to become the object of
any general trific, fai less to be the object.of any
money-negociation. It had been said, that Presidents
of the Board of Controul had no right to patronage:
this might be very true; but patronage they had en-
joyed ever since the Board had been instituted. It
the Noble Lord was to be condemned, it must
be by the evidence before the House, and not by fo-
reign aid ; he must be condemned upon this unexe-
cuted intention, which was all that had been proved
against him. Although it.was not possible to justify
the conduct of the Noble Lord (Castlereagh) upon
principle, Mill the Noble Speaker thought that' the
Resolutions of the Noble Lord (A. Hamilton) would
draw down upon his head too heavy a punishment.
There were degrees of punishment—one would not
puni sh a man for intention to Commit a crime so severely
as for the commission of that crime ; or the malty animus
might make a distinction of punishment. The simple
dismissal from office of the Noble Lord would be his
least injury. It might be said this was no punish-
ment ; and, certainly, such was the precariousness
of office, that in general it could not be considered
as such. But when grave charges of corruption were
made, sanctioned and registered against a Minister,
and in consequence of these, he was dismissed his
office, was it then no punishment ? The Noble
Speakerhoped the House would exercise its sound
discretion, and when it considered what was due to,
the public, would reflect a little what was due to the
individual. He concluded with moving, that the
other Orderi of the Day be then yead,
Mr. W. WYNNE declared that if the House pas-
sed over this transaction as one unworthy of its notice
it would be no less than declaring that the Noble
Lord was at liberty to open a shop for the barter of
seats in that House, and carry on every species of
corruption and abuse. It had been stated on a for-
mer nit ht, that an Office was opened every Session
at the Treasury, for the barter of seats in Parliament.
And the House was now called on by the Noble
Lord who spoke last, to declare indirectly that such
practices were justifiable. He certainly thought the
course pursued by the Noble Lord (Castlereagh) was
more Jtalicious and respectful to the House than that
produced on former occasions, when accused persons
attempted to justify their conduct. The manner in
which he now acted, certainly ought to mitigate the
judgment of the House ; and whatever resolution the
House should adort, it ought to be more witha view
to maintain its own dignity, than to press with any
weighty punishment the Noble Lord who stood ac-
cused before them. But then, it did not follow that
the House was to take no notice of it. It was a most
heavy and serious offence, for a Minister of the
Clown to enter into negociations to commute the pa-
tronage of his office for Seats in Parliament. And if
the Parliament now passed over this as a matter of no
importance, see what a dangerous precedent it would
establish.

Mr. CROAKER rose to do justice to the memory
of a friend of his then no more (the Marquis of Sligo)
name had been alluded to by the Noble Lord
(A. Hamilton) as a deep participator in corruption.
If the Noble Lord had read the Report with that at-
tention which he had owed it, he would have found
the story of Reding, as to the Marquis of Sligo, most
absurd and contradictory. First, the Marquis of
Sligo was to procure the person for the place, then the
place for the person ; and, upon being further pressed,
Reding was driven to more inconsistencies. If the
Noble Lord had seen this, as he must have done,
upon the face of the Report, upon what principle
could he charge his (the Honourable Member's)
Noble Friend with corruption, at the expence of in-
vading the silence of the tomb ? The Noble Lord
had declared his readiness to retract where he was
wrong—that intention the Hon. Member called upon
him to fulfil, in justice to the memory of the Marquis
of Sligo. To prove the fallacy of the whole of Red-
ing's evidence, the Hon. Member adduced that pas-
sage where he said, that Lord Sligo, upon Lord
Clancarty's name being mentioned, said, " he was
his man." Now it was the well known law, that,
for an Irish Borough, an Irish Peer, such as Lord
Clancarty was, could not sit. That, treaty, there-
fore, could not be carried on ; and the same might
be said of Lord Hawarden, to whom the Borough
was said to be offered through Reding. But the Hon.
Member pledged himself that Lord Sligo had no
Borough, as it was called. He knew his LOrdship
intimately, and would take upon him to assert that
his Noble Fricgid had no influence, but what arose
from his landed property in the county where he re-
sided. It, would be therefore no small portion of
the indignation which the prevarication of Reding
must excite, that he had thus invaded the peace of
the grave, to screen himself from guilt half an hour
longer. The second Resolution of the Noble Lord
(A. Hamilton), that the exchange, but for a mis-
understanding among the underlings, would have
taken place, was thus false in the fact. the first
Resolution too stated that the Noble Lord (Castle-
reagh), did things both as Secretary of State and as
President of the Board of Controul ; *hen the fact
was, that his Lordship was not President of the
Board then. When the Noble Lord (A. Hamilton)
found this, he would be obliged to say " Both my
premises are faulty—Vote for my conclusion."—
( Laughter
_from the Opposition Benehrs.)—Whether the
Noble Lord would be ablq to forgive his friends for
laughing at him, the Honourable Member could not
say—( larighterfrom all sides)—but he could assure the
Noble Lord, it was at his logic they were laughing,
and not at himself.

Lord MILTON did not rise to speak on the ques-
tion, but merely to explain his conduct, which had
been alluded to so directly by the Noble Lord (Cas-
tlereagh). He was free to confess, that at the words
which fell from that NoLle Lord at the time alluded
to, he felt it impossible to refrain !rem an expression
of the indignation' he fet from the very commence-
ment of his speech. As an apology to the House,

however, 'was necessary, he rose now ter the' purpose
of making it
Mr. W. SMITH thought that Lord Sligix.had
nothing in the remotest degree to do with the pres'nt
case ; but he could not reconcile the warmth with
which the Honourable Member (Mr. Croaker) had
vindicated his Noble Friend from any concern with
what, according to him, pressed so lightly upon the
Noble Lord (Castlereagh). The Honourable Mem-
ber thought it highly unconstitutional that seats in
Parliament should be to be obtained in the manner
which had been brought before the House. As to
the first inconsistency which the Honourable Member
(Mr. Croaker) had pointed out in the Noble, Lord's
Resolutions, it had never occurred to any one of the
Committee, and therefore no extreme degree of blame
could attach to any man for not discovering it. As
to the second, he thought that if a man could hold
the duties of two offices, he was able to violate them.
As to the patronage being only used in this particular
instance, and not to serve Government in general,
was not Lord Clancarty a Government man ? and
could there be a doubt which way he would vote ?
It was said that no corruption attached to the voters
for these seats that were to he obtained. They could
be gotten for 40001. or 50001. and there must be cor-
ruption somewhere. It was impossible to disconnect
this subject from that of Parliamentary Reform. Lord
Chatham had said, that if Parliament did not reform
from within, it would be reformed from without, and
that with a vengeance. When abuses like these forced
themselves into our eyes, if one reform were not ob-
tained, another would be called tor, which no man
would wish to see less than the Honourable Member.
—He considered the Order of the Day on the ques.
tion of Irish Commissioners' Fees, as a matter of in-
finitely less importance than the subject under the
consideration of the House. The present was no or-
dinary common-place question. He wished Gentle.
men to consider the reasons why the statutes, inflict-
ing pains and penalties on persons giving or receiving
bribes, were passed. Was it not that the House of
Commons should be pure and free from all imputa-
tion of improper or corrupt motives ? \Vas not that
the principle ? He thought that the character of
Mr. Reding had but little to do with the question.—
He only lamented his connection with the Noble
Lord, by which he thought the Noble Lord appeared
to be somewhat contaminated. But, much as he
was disposed to listen f-avourably to what had fallen
from the Noble Lord, when he' recollected to have
heard in that House frequently, such strong accusa-
-1 tions on the subject of con option in Ireland, in toe
promotion of the measure of the Union, from Gentle-
men who, from their locality, must have been ac-
quainted with the transactions there ; and upon that
question, when he recollected to have heard those
accusations so often repeated, and never answered,
he must say at least, that the reflection suggested to
his mind was this, that there is a sort of tendency
in the human mind to form an estimate upon such
matters accommodated to the circumstances and
situations in which men are placed; and that those
who are in private life Gentlemen and men of ho- '
nour, do, somehow or other, when they get. into the
tracks and labyrinths of politics, find out how t
reconcile the use of improper means to what they
may conceive to be wise and good ends. He recol-
lected some years ago, when Mr. Hastings was on his
defence, that he stated such matters, without the
least apparent idea of impropriety, in justification of
his conduct, as, to say the least of it, astonished him,
and indeed astonished a majority of that House.—.
That astonishment rose to a very high degree. The
fact was, it ended by Mr. Hastings's denial of his
own defence ; and his advocates were reduced to the
necessity of saying that his defence was made for l
him, and that be read that which was not the off-
spring of his own mind. From such things he col.
lected, that political men used means, without much
scruple, to obtain ends. He thought that a regard-
lessness of means to gain ends might be as produc-
tive of public evil as a total indifference to ends.—
Unless a heavy mark of the disapprobation of that I
House fell upon the transaction disclosed, the House
would lose greatly in its character in the country, I
and would place itself in a state of jeopardy in which I
it had never been before At the same time, he wish- I
ed to act with moderation towards the individual j
'party. It seemed to be thought by some, that the
current of public opinion should be withstood man-.
fully. He thought that on some occasions that might
be right ; but if the direction of public opinion was I
right, it might be dangerous indeed to attempt to
repress it. He concluded by observing, that the case
was as strong as need be made out, and he could not
conceive how any man could do his duty without
affixing upon it a mark of reprobation.
Mr. M. SUTTON thought that in this, as in every
other case, the punishment inflicted ought to be pro-,
portioned to the crime. No bribery—no improper.
action, with a view to his own private emolument,
had been attributed to the Noble Lord. He, there.
fore, did not think they could feel themselves impe-
riously called on by their duty to their Constituents,
to insert the Resolutions on the Journals of the House.
He concurred with a Noble Lord on that side of the
House (Lord Binning) in the propriety of passing on
to the Order of the Day.
Mr. G R ATTAN agreed with the Hon. Gentleman
who had just sat down, that punishment should ever
be proportioned to the magnitude of the offence; and
he therefore was of opinion that one of his Majesty's
Ministers presiding at the Board sf Conti-mil, should,
for being concerned in such a transaction, be punished
by depravation of power. He did the Noble Viscount
the justice to say, he had made a very decent defence;
but he understood that he acknowledged the fact, but
denied, but without any idea, that it could be injuri-
ous to the Constitution. He did not believe that he
had any such idea, but he did think that he had acted
in an unwarrantable manner to accommodate a friend.
He had violated the Constitution ; but was not aware
of the extent of the effects of that violation ; the evi-
dence on the table was to substantiate the former ;
and it was for them to consider if they could overlook
that transaction, in consideration of the latter. Par-
liament seats could noLbe sold without great injury
to the Constitution : holding two- offices, the Noble
Lord had used the one against the other, and both to
further an object which he ought not to have concern.
ed himself with. Ministers had no right to make use
of public offices, which were in fact public property,
to purchase seats in Parliament If the principles
which enabled Ministers to act contrary to the sense
of Parliament were considered,. the magnitude of the