Star.
London, England, 1806-04-22 00:00:00

prekri; and (aid, they had dikharged their dtitv
y the belt dittates of their judgment and confeience.
Lord TEMPLE, without any with to withhold
from the Direftors any opportunity they cleared for
their own vindication, could not confent to the pro
dutlion of the documents,Alluded to, as purporting
to convey any inftruftions to Lord Wellefley, or at
all attach any cenfure upon his conduit. In the firß
place, it bad never reached him, and coafequently
could be no evidence of his departing from any in.
Itruflions it contained. Great, part of it confifted of
opinions and cenfures upon circumflances in his Ad.
miniltration, which occurred five years before, and,
confequently, could be no fort of evidence spina
him on that ground.
. Mr. WINDHAM, though forry to, differ from
certain Right Hoe. Friends of his upon the prefent
occafion, yet, feeling the queltion one of great im-
portance, and hinsfelf therefore bound to exprefe an
opinion upon it, he mua give an impartial one ; and
therefore, beeping, totally. out of view all perfonal
confiderations, tussah ref eft to Lord WelleOey, anti
confidering the queltion merely as between A. and B.
he was rather of opinion that the papers ought io be
produced. For though the houfe was bound to main-
tain impartial juthce with refpeft to the charafter acid
conduit of Lord Wellefley, yet it was not bound, to
that its eyes and ears to every thing elfe upon the
great Calved of India.Afrairs. It would not be fair
to give the authority of the Court of Directors againft
what had been done,. neither would it be fair to give
their fanaion and opinion las An authority approving
of that conduit which the Houk would be called
upon to try. In the preterit joitance. however. there
was no great danger of the Houle, being nulled by
the production of the papers, ai the sontents of them•
were already pretty well Wootton. . Thinking, there-
fete, that the production of thofe papers could be of
no material advantage or• difadtantege to the cafe of
the Noble Lord, he was inclined to vote for their pro.
doefton, becaufe he thought that the Houfe had a
right to be put in poffelhon of the means of eßimat•
ing and afcertaining the value of the authority of the
Court of Direilers. Although, perhaps, According
to the ftria rules of one of the Courts of Weßminfter
Hall, thofe papers Should not be granted, ye; he
conceived that Parliament fhould not be fettered in
the fame manner. He could fee no objeftion to the
produftion of the papers in the fhape they hid
been propofed, and as be thought they might convey
much ufeful information to the Houfe, he &mild
fupport the original motion.
The MASTER of the ROLLS obferved, that no
two Gentlemen who called for this document agreed
in the rearm' for,which they faid it ought to be pro-
duced. He maintained that this was a proof there
was no folid ground for its prodoftion. He main-
tained alto, that the falls upon which the opinion of
the Court of Directors bad been formed on the con-
doß of the Noble Marquis, which this difpatch con-
tained, ought to be before the Houfe before the pro.
prietyor impropriety of that opinion could be judged
of. He fupported the previous veltion.
Mr. WINDHAM and Dr. LAWRENCE faid a
few words in explanation.
Mr. ALEXANDER did not confider that a dif-
ference of opinion about meafures of Government
could amount to criminality. If the Houfe were to
confider thernfelves in the nature of a Grand Jury,
they were not at liberty to ark about the opinions of
other people, any more than Grand juries were to
or& the opinions of the Magißrates before whom the
examinations were taken.
• Mr. FULLER Aid, the Honourable Gentleman
who fpoke laR was wrong in point of feet, as Grand
Juries did always examine the Magiarates, who were
on that account always in attendance at the Affixes.
Mr. WILBERFORCE obferved, that if the paper
would throw any light upon the fubjea, the Houfe
could not do otherwire than call for it.
Mr. SHERIDAN Aid, that he perfectly 'agreed
with the Right Honourable Gentleman who Spoke
laff, that the Court of Direftors fhould certainly base
an opportunity, at a proper time, of putting the
Houfe in poffeffion of their fentiments upon the af-
fairs of India t but it did not appear to him that the
prefent was the proper time, when the produftion of
the papers might have an cleft on the question of
impeachment, which the Houfe were to decide on.
It bad been obferved by every body, that the paper
ought not to have any influence upon that queßion.
It therefore appeared to him better, that it thould
not be produced until it was decided. He concluded
by fuggefling 'a refolution' 4, That the altered dif-
patch of the 3d of April, 1805, had not the fanaion
of the Court of Direftors."
Lord ARCHIBALD HAMILTON fhortly re.
plod to the arguments that had been urged againft
his motion, and difclaimed the idealof having brought
it forward with any view of prejudicing the cafe of
the Noble Marquis.
Lord CASTLEREAGH, in reply to a queftion
put to Mr. Fox, Rated, that the difpatch refpeiting the
Treaty of Oude, in 1803, had been firß drawn up by
the Court of Directors, and altered by the Commiifi-
oners of the Board of' Controul. In every thing that
did not relate to queflions of war or peace, the dif-
patches originated with the Court of Direftors.
Mr. R. THORNTON faid, the Houfe appeared to him to be In
a great error in matter of fad. The Court of Diredors had Orft
written a dilate's, which cenfored (Irately tome part of Lord
Welkfley's conduit. The Board of Controul altered that in a
great many refpeda, and fofeened down feveral of the cap; 'Mons,
but Rill what remained war, u far as It went, the *pinion of the
Court of Directors. A Right Hos. Gentleman (Mr. Fex) bad
conceived an improper opinion of the Court of Diredors, if be fup-
poLd they could be &Holed, forced to lip papers contrary to
their opinion. If there were no other way id avoiding that, they
would at raft be at liberty to reign their atuations.
The motion being put on the previous quellion, there appeared
oo the divifion—Forthe Motion t I—Againtt It 37-- Majority Stri.
While (trauma were excluded, we underltood feveral India pa-
pers were moved for. When Rangers were again admitted,
Mr. EtOSh entered into a hiftory of the policy adopted in tormer
years, with regard to the Ripply of the Weft India Mantis with the
more important articles of fuhfiftenee. Previoully to the year 1792,
the Proprietors had reprefented to the Privy Council, that they
could not be fupplied with the neceffaries of life, without imme•
diatc intereourfe with the American States; this was nut diredUy
acceded to, but, fulefreptently, indulgencies were granted. The
confequenee of the adherence of Government to the Naviga-
tion Law was, that nine hundred and thirty-feven Slips, of
a so.ixo tons, navigated by 6goo men belonging to Britain,
were employed In the trade for the colonial fupplles, but when
this fyltem was relaxed, only 19,00 [OM of British (hipping, and
1900 mariners, were engaged in this fervice. If the line were pro-
perly drawn, he conceived toopoo tons of (hipping, and 8,000
feamen, could cafily be employed In the trade. He had heard it
was the defign of his Mejefty's Minißers to lay open this branch
of commerce to the Americans, and to take from the Colonial
Governors the ciecaponal refponfibility to which they had been
properly expored, by a relaxation of the law on urgent oceatinra.
He hoped, that on further couLderation (itch a martin would be