Star.
London, England, 1827-05-03 00:00:00

viduals, in order to the form,. ion of an effectiv.
tmited Administration. Now, those Noble Lords en
once took it for granted thee my Noble Relatia
was to be placed at the bead of that Government. -
I'hey negociated with him as one fully authorised to
form a Cabinet, without its ever appearing to enter.
their minds, that the fact of his being authorised to,
negotiate, made him necessarily, and.
.as a matter
of course, a person to be looked upon as the head of the
intended Administration. If the Noble Lords of whom I
hove spoken, contemplated the powers with which my
Noble Relative was invested in the light in which they'
certainly appear to have contemplated them, was I not
justified iq similarly viewing the situation of the Right
Hon. Gentleman? The Marquis of Ha,tings was sub-
sequently employed upon a negotiation of the same,
nature, and was certainly quite as unlikely to be placed'
at the head of the new Ministry as my Noble Relative.
He was in fact, at the time, ignorant of the proposed
bead of the Administration, yet he was freely negociated
with ; nor was he, for a moment, regarded by the parties
to whom he addressed himself in the light of the in-
tended head. I have thus, soy Lords, shewn from the
two cases to which I have referred, that none of the
parties took it for granted that the negotiator was to be
the Premier. Now, I will shew, from the conduct of
the Right Hon. Gentleman himself, that he was, in a
similar case, governed by the same principles. When,
upon the death of Mr. Perceval, Lord Liverpool waited
on the Right Honourable Gentleman, to propose to
him to become a Member of the Administration
then about to be formed, what, I will ask, was the
very first question put to the .Noble Lord? The
first question was, " Who is to be First Lord of the
Treasury?"--(Load cheers.) The whole of this, your
Lordships are doubtless aware, is recorded in a written
memorandum still in existence. Now, my Lords, if the
Rioht Honourable Gentleman was justified in putting
AA a question in 1812, might I not, without any great
breach of propriety, take the liberty of asking a similar
qtlestion in 1827? Your Lordships will observe, that
Ithroughout my recent communications with that Right
I Honourable Gentleman, I have in no respect departed
from the example set me by himself. I. believe that
Right Honotirable Gentleman to be as entirely incapable
of any unbecoming act as any other individual in exis-
tence; but I Confess, the circumstances under which
the reply to my communication was made appear not
as satisfactory as I, thought myself entitled to hope for.
I put the simple question—Who is to be at the head of
his Majesty's Government? It had been stated that on
the 10th, the day on which I put this question, the Right
Honourable Gentleman was actually appointed to the
office of First Lord of the Treasury, and therefore fully
authorised to give that answer to my in airy which was
ultimately given ; instead of that, how er, be thought it
necessary to communicate with his Majesty on the subject.
Then, am I not justified in supposing that he was then
wit in that office? and, if not there, surely I was entitled
to information as to the individual who was to fill it,—
Prom all the circumstances to which I have called your
Lordships' attention, I feel no hesitation in affirming,
that, even on the 11th, that Hon. Gentleman had not
received his appointment. Ido not mean to deny that
he was not fully authorised to send me the letter, which
had the honour of receiving from him; but really, it
is too hard that I should now be told that my conduct
on this occasion was peevish, ill• tempered, hasty, and so
an. I simply confined myself to putting a single ques-
don, and when the reply arrived, I thought myself
called on, for the reasons already stated, to tender my
resignation • in doing which, I must take credit for
being as little influenced by personal considerations as
any man. During seven or eight years that I have sat
in-the Cabinet, I have had the best reason for believing
that I enjoyed the good will of all my colleagues—
nay, even the good will of the Right Honourable Gen-
tleman himself ; and I fearlessly appeal to the Noble
Lord opposite, in support of this assertion. I have been
remonstrated with upon my resiation—those have
been found who have said to me "You did wrong, you
should not have resigned; the letter addressed to you
was not intended to produce your resignation." But,
can your Lordships, after a review of the circumstances,
to which I have adverted, concur in such a view of my
case? It has been supposed, that I, and my colleagues,
had entered into a conspiracy to impede the formation
of a new Government. But I entertain the fullest con-
fidence, that this, the earliest, opportunity which I
could command, of stating the truth to your Lordships.l
and the public, will have the effect, totally and for
ever, of removing this imputation. The facts have
been faithfully stated to your Lordships, and you will
deduce from them such conclusions as you think they
justify, but I take leave to say, th,at I entertain no ap-
prehension for the result.
Lord BEXLEY said that the charge of conspiracy
or cabal was totally destitute of any foundation. Such
an idea he felt confident, never entered the mind of
hitnself or his late colleagues. He could offer no better
proof of this to their Lordships, than by referring to the
mantier in which he himself had acted. He deeply
regretted that the country hsfd been deprived of the,
important services of those with whom he had so long
acted. Having entertained the same sentiments they
did upon one most important public question, it might
very naturally be asked why he remained in office with
those from whom he dissented on this question? He was
always of opinion, that however political men might
differ on the Catholic Question, they should not carry
their exasperation so far as to refuse acting together in
the same Cabinet, if they thought they could, in other
respects, contribute to the welfare of the country. For
himself he ci,uld only say that whatever part the other
Members of the Government might take, he was deter-
mined, as far as in him lay, to maintain a Protestant
Crown and a Protestant Parliament.
The Earl of MANSFIELD said, that highly as he
valued the feelings of those distinguished individuals
ss hu had retired from office, he much doubted whether
the course they had pursued was judicious, or tended
to assist the Protestant cause, which, no doubt, they
intended to aid. If they had kept open the communi-
cation with his Majesty, they might have recommended
Ithe formation of a Ministry on Protestant principles,
backed by the assurance that such a Government would
meet with the warm support of a large majority in that
House and in the country. If the Ministry were even
to be divided into two parties, that decided ekepon-
derance might have been given to the Protestant cause
in it, which would ensure its continued superiority.
However well those Noble individuals bad meant, the;
had not taken that course; and one consequence was,
that the country, had to regret the retirement of so
many individuals by whom it had been so long and so
ably served—had to regret the loss of the eminent ser-
vices of the Noble Duke, of the Noble and Learned
Lord (Eldon) near him, and of a Right Hun. Gentle-
man whose talents and unwearied zeal in the public