The Statesman.
London, England, 1824-02-04 00:00:00

the late Chancellor of the Exchequer still adhered to, and
which were only taken off by his successor so late as last
year, were now the subject of numerous petitions by the
parties who once thought that they sheltered them, but
who now regarded them as prejudicial to their best in-
terests. The partial relaxations had given so great an itn-
petus to tradeand indnstry in the North of Ireland, within
a single year, that the most determined opponents of the
measure now implored the legislature to place the trade
of both countries on the same footing. It would be
well if his Majesty's Ministers had adverted to that
cause as greatly tending to the improvement that had
taken place in the resources and 'finances of the country.
It would also have been well if they had adverted to the
other cause, namely, the remission of taxation ; for he
believed that when taxes were repealed. there was not
only considerable relief experienced. but also an indirect
operation towards increasing the consumption and demand
of all the articles of trade and commerce. This proposition
was too evident to be disputed, and he now wished to put
an end to the absurd paradox which had found abettors in
that House, as well as out of doors ; namely, that a large
expenditure gave the same impulse to trade and commerce
as freedom from taxation.—(Hear, hear.) He wished to
notice these two leading features,in reference to the subject
matter of the Speech, because he thought that the state of
prices was greatly influenced by the causes in question.
He flattered himself that their Lordships would readily
agree with him in opinion, that increased consumption
must be attended with increased production ; and that being
the case, freedom of trade and remission of taxation must
be regarded as advantages of the very first importance.
In fact, they were among the grand sonrces of national
prosperity. Having adverted to that part of the Speech
which gave the most satisfactory view of public affairs,
with respect to the progress we were making towards re-
covering from our embarrassments, he came now to notice
certain passages which might be looked upon as ,
incident-
ally introduced; be meant those passages in the Speech
which adverted to the public interest, and connected with
and liable to be influenced by the political state of foreign
nations, and the measnres which foreign pout era adopted.
It certainly appeared to him, that Ministers ought to have
been more explicit in this respect in the Speech
which had been read. They bad omitted to afford
Information, which they very fairly might have given
without violating the secretly of the Cabinet,
or the obligations of office. (Hear, hear, hear.)
In their communications with Foreign Powers, they were
not so reserved, and he saw no reason why their Lordships
should not expect from them a clearer and more compre-
hensive outline of the state of our foreign relation'. It
would have become his Majesty's Ministers, who deprecat-
ed the late war on the independence of Spain, to have now,
in the Speech which they put into his Majesty's mouth,
expressed their regret at the unfortunate termination of
that war. They ought to have done so, as the ostensible
Representatives of a free country. He said this, not in
reference to the particular Constitution of Spain, but in
reference to the indisputable right which every free nation
had to improve her own Constitution by whatever means
she thought most expedient—a right which could be sub-
•erted only on the basest and most detestable principles.
(Hear, hear.) When lie found such an interference with
this right, as led to the occupation of a whole country by
the troops of a state that was the jealous rival of England,
be thought it would be impossibie for Ministers to have
observed that species of courtly silence which the Royal
Speech displayed. lie would have thought that, without
betraying the Councils of their Sovereign, they would
have considered it incumbent upon them to put into his
Majesty's month expressions becoming the Monarch of a
great and free nation upon the violation of all the rights of
freedom in another. They ought to have expressed his
Majesty's regret that the grand principle which authorised
a nation to perfect its own institutions, was attacked and
subverted in Spain, in a manner that plunged that unfortu-
nate country into horrors which could not be described,
and sent some of the most valuable of the inhabitants
to wander as exiled outcasts all over the world.—(llear,
hear!)—When the Noble Earl (Somers) said he dia•
liked Chemist!' of every kind, he (the Marquess of L.)
would ask him, whether there was not now in Spain
an Vermin' the most cruel, fierce, and fanatical that ever dis-
graced any nation calling itself civilized? lie would say,
that the present deplorable state of Europe arose out of the
prevalence of principles which it was the bounden duty of his
Majesty's Ministers to oppose. IVlten the law of Europe and
of nations was grossly violated, let us not flatter ourselves
that things could remain as they were, and that we should not
have further difficulties to contend with. Was it not natural
to expect, (lid Ministers not believe that when the recognized
principle which fur ages had been admitted among civilized
nations, was now outraged, the day might come, and that at
no di:giant period, when Great Britain in her own defence
might be called upon to take a more decisive part? Let their
Lordships look to the State of Europe, and they would find
that after the conquest and subjugation of II innparte, those
countries, the independence of which was declared by the No-
ble Earl to be placed on a soli t foundation in consequence of
that event, were still in the most abject thraldom. Should he
be contradicted for a moment when he said that the whole of
the smaller States of the Continent were under the controul of
S or 4 great Powers,who exercised a vexatious, a tormenting.
nay a tyrannical influence in all that related to their internal
•conce►ns.—(Cheers.)--Could he be contradicted when he
should say, that in no country under their dominion, did
there remain a portion of independence? Was there a
State in Europe which had not felt the influence of those
Monarchs and of the principles upon which they acted, and
which might not be called upon to alter or abandon its
Constitution, to waive its rights, and suffer itself to be
controlled by those despotic Powers, even at the dictates
of their caprice? He did not feel himself called upon by
the statements in the Speech which had that day been
delivered, to declare that the situation of Europe was
satisfactory. In many parts of the Continent there
existed grounds of complaint against those great Powers ;
even the once independent and pacific It-public of Switzer-
land had been subjected to their interference—and inter-
ference of a nature, which. if directed against this country
we should deem outrageous and insulting. Was it not ao
attack virtually upon this conetry—was tt not an attetnpt
to establish a greens of coercion, to take away the Wa
pendence of another State? and in doing so, did it not
destroy that principle upon which this country had always
acted, that of maintaining the balance of power by sup-
-porting the weak against the atrong?—lf the state of
Europe were such as be bad described—and if the many
minor States were to be subjected to the orders of the few
greater Powers which he had described, how could be be
called upon to express his satisfaction at such a position?
But, he turned with pleasure and real satisfaction to the
liberal principles upon which, with respect to the South
American States, we bad begun to act. He saw with no
common degree of satisfaction, the principle of free trade
at length acknowledged and acted upon; because upon the
cultivation of commerce, upon that great principle with the
inhabitants of any quarter of the glebe whatever, must de-
pend the power of this country to maintain that rank and
that iniuence amongst nations which she bad hitherto
held. But although he felt satisfied at the first step that bad
been taken in that path, he was not prepared to say that Minis.
ten ought not to lave gone further; indeed be hoped they
bad gone farther than they themselves were prepared to
avow; but be could not help regretting that that step had
not been takes at a much earlier period, by which this
country would have manifested that which it was equally
its duty and Its interest to do—the right and the disposi-
tion to act independently. He felt great satisfaction at
the free and fearless conduct of the United• States of Ame-
rica upon that subject, which was at once becoming its
character and its power.' There was in it no dissimula-
tion no ambiguity, no hesitation—the sentiments of its go-
vernment were avowed with a candour and a firmness be-
coming its situation and its strength; and, believing that
id every point of view it was important that the interests