The Statesman.
London, England, 1824-02-18 00:00:00

UTE STATESMAN

but there was a distinct indication of a hostile feeling.
Did Sir William A'Court withdraw himself from the
Spanish (Averment in consequence of instructions
from. home'? If not. considering he had withdrawn
himself under such circumstances and at such a
moment, when perhaps the fate of Spain might
have hinged on the conduct of this country, why was be
not recalled, reprimanded,—nay, why was he not even
impeached? If it was in consequence of instructions, then,
contrary to all our notions, contrary to all our engage-
ment., contrary to our pledged faith, this country declared
a hostile feeling against Spain ; and why ? because the
Cortes of the country in the legal exercise of Utheir un-
questionable authority, declared the king to be for a time
incapable of exercising the Royal function, and appointed
a Regency: but for this special and only purpose of chang-
ing the seat of Government to Cadiz, with provision for the
resumption by the king of his full power, on the arrival of
the Government. In that act the Cortes was inathe exer-
cise of its legal and undoubted authority. What country
or Parliament would question the legality of such an act as
this P Did we forget the Act of our own Parliament in
1810? He felt the delicacy of adverting to that subject;
and Goa forbid be should for one moment think of intro-
ducing in the same sentence the name of our late revered
Sovereign—at the close of a long reign—struck with the
heaviest calamity that could Aid our nature—with the
name of a wretch who still unfortunately lived, the
scourge of his people—(hear), for all they had, done, and
for all they had forborne to do—(hear). the most finished
specimen that existed in human nom of all that was
base and truckling, of all that was perfidious, bloody, and
perjured, and therefore a very fit object for the collected
sympathies of the other side of the house.—(hear) It was
the duty of this Parliament to appoint a Regency. Had
the Cortes of Spain the same power or had they not?
and was Sir W. A'Court a fit judge of the circumstances
under which the Cortes of Spain were to exercise that
power? If in 1810 the Minister of any Foreign Court had
withdrawn himself from London, stating the Regency
Bill as his vindication for such an act, and that he was ac-
credited not to the Regency, but the king of England,
should we not have considered such Minister either insane
or as having received instructions from his Court. The
Corms were not assembled by their own power, declaring
the throne to be vacant, and they only declared the King
for a time incapacitated from exercising the Royal func-
tions, appointing a Regency for the solo purpose of
changing the seat of Government, and providing for the
King's immediate restoration. But by this Sir W. A'Court
abandoned the Government, this following a very short
time after the three famous notes of the three Allied
Powers, England io the person of Sir Wm. A'Court follow-
ing in the train of those three Powers, whose principles
she had disclaimed, and against whose conduct she bad
protested. Ministers could not have been insincere and
base enough to have authorized such an act. At the same
time we bad not seen Sir Wm. A'Court recalled to answer
these charges. But he did not wish to enter more par-
ticularly into the conduct of Sir Wm. A'Contt in this trans-
action. A much better opportunity would be given by
the production of the correspondence with the Spanish
Government for taking a fair view of his conduct; but
this he (Lord N.) would say, he always contrived to place
himself in a position from whence he must have known
that mediation was impracticable. He allowed the time
to pass away after the Spanish Government had left
Seville, until, by the blockade and investment of Cadiz, he
must have known that mediation was impracticable.
Where was Sir Wm. A'Court from the period, and it was not
a short one, of the Government leaving Seville to the time of
the investment and blockade of Cadiz 1 He was at Seville
with the French army, the Army of the Faith, and the servile
party—at Seville, where he must have known the full effect
of the countenance which he was then giving by his presence
to the servile party—at Seville, where, as an instance of the
effect produced on the minds of that party, no less extraordi-
nary a proposition was made to Sir Wm. A'Court by an Wu-
elated and sanguinary mob headed by priests, than that Sir
Wm. A'Court would consent to be made by them Governor of
Seville in the name of the absolute King. The Ambassador
declined that offer. stating that if so mad and monstrous a pro-
position should be repeated, be must leave Seville. Why did
he remain one hour at Seville with the French army, the Army
of the Faith, the Priests, and mob? Ile must have known,
seen, and felt the full effect which his presence was producing
—namely, an impression that his country was taking a decided
part against the Constitutional Government of Spain ; and yet
this is the profession of our intention, inclination, end wish at
any moment to come forward'with an offer of mediation and
friendly support towards Spain. But what was the immediate
effect of this conduct 'I That the hint which Sir Wm. A'Court
had thus apparently and very intelligibly given, was immedi-
ately taken by the French Army, and every traitor in Spain
from one end of the country to the other. That whatever
might have been their doubts and difficulties before, the Army
immediately advanced, hlorillo immediately deserted, stating
by a public proclamation that the grounds for his conduct were
the steps Sir Wm. A'Court had taken ; giving Sir William
A'Court's conduct as the vindication of his own treason to his
country. lie (Lord N.) was bound to believe Sir W. A'Court
meant well, charitably and generously, in the various attempts
he made on more than one occasion to persuade the Spanish
Generals to withdraw themselves from Spain. A communica-
tion had been made to a person of whose conduct end gallant
and unimpeachable fidelity it was impossible to speak in terms
of (adequate admiration Geo. Alava, who was intimately con• 1
mewed with the era of the Spanish Revolution. lie never ex•
pressed any strong concurrence in the abstract principle of the
Constitution itself, but he felt nobly and honestly that from the
moment Spain was threatened with a foreign attempt to change
her inatitutions,the cause became united with thatof the country.
Therefore, faithful to that honest and loyal principle, he
nobly withstood all the temptations and persuasions held
out to him to save his own most valuable life from the
wreck of his wretched country. And who was the person
who endeavoured to persuade Gen. Alava to save himself
from the sinking cause of his country by secretly with-
drawing? It was Sir Wm. A'Court, who, no doubt, did
this upon the principle of the purest generosity, from the
purest attachment to the person of General Alava, and the
warmest admiration of his patriotism, but at the same time
Sir William A'Court Must have forgotten, %hat General
Alava did not forget, that the withdrawing such a person
at such a time from Cadis, could not but have had the
effect of hastening the fall of Spain—at all events, he ex-
cepted his character from the reproach short of indelible
infamy, which had blasted the characters of Abisbal, Mo-
rino, and Ballasteros. What would be the answer so this?
That Sir William A'Court's conduct could be referred to
nothing but a wish to save one of the best men in Spain,
who, by his connection with British achievements, had
become a peculiar object for the sympathy of this country;
but was it fair, or within the duties of Sir William
A'Court, who bad always kept studiously aloof from
co-operation with the Constitutional Government, who
had placed himself in a distant position—who had
maintained a cold silence—who was the non-conducting
medium between the last sigh of expiring Spain and the sym-
pathies of this country—was it his duty to run the risk,
even for the sake of saving so valuable a man as General
Alava, of striking the last blow to the expiring cause of
Spain ? There were one or two circumstances deeply af-
fecting this ease, which the house might not be aware
of. Ministers would not contradict that overtures were
made, at Madrid, to Sir W. A'Court, on the part of the
Cortes, offering to recognise the independence of South
America upon terms the most adyaotageons. We rather
preferred to risk all differences which might accrue he.
tween us and an Absolute King, and which might yet, be-
fore a twelvemonth was over, plunge us in a war with all
Europe. The Cortes had repealed the ancient Spanish law
of restriction upon foreign commerce. They had acknow-
ledged,ln the most frank and liberal manner, the claims of
British merchants, and provision was made for the liquida-
tion of those claims. Of that we bad assurance last year,
and received the congratulations of his Majesty. These
were offered as an earnest of the desire of Spain to make
the mediation of this country not only an object of Yuma.

pity, andjustice, but of indubitable advantage. We ne-
glected these opportunities for the sake of gratifying the
Holy Alliance and restoring the absolute Monarch, and
and those hellish and murderous positions which were un-
kennelled when he was allowed to leave Cadiz, to allow
him to pluck away all those whose crimes had been to give
free institutions to their country, such as was recoenised i a
1812. The rest of what we conceded to France might be
shortly stated. A blockade was allowed to be formed of a
nature such as we, in the very meridian of our maritime
power, mistress as we were of the seas. had never attempt-
ed. Not only commerce was excluded, but the seat of Go-
vernment itself was invested, by which Ministers were ex-
cluded from all political communication with a friendly
power. This was a case such as, in the zenith of our mari-
time power, we had never called on any State to recognize;
but it was now conceded without remonstrance to the more
successful ambition of France. The right ofsearch, under
circumstances that could not be justified by any. pretext of
necessity or caution, had been allowed. English merchant
vessels were boarded, searched, and detained under every
circumstance of violence and insult. Their Captains, in
more than one instance,prisoners on the deck of the French
vessels, and that, not in the neighbourhood of Cadiz, but
at sea—in some instances more than a degree of western
longitude from Cadis. English vessels, to the ruin of their
owners, were detained, which had entered Cadis, and taken
cargoes on board before the blockade wiz declared. They
had not the means of applying to any authority, and when
an application was made to the French Admiral
they were refused under every circumstance of incivili-
ty and insult. It may be asked, why were not repre-
sentations made to the proper authorities ? He would tell
them, because our Ambassador, instead of remaining to pro-
feet the British interests at Cadis, bad gone to Gibraltar
—because there was no body there to whom repre-
sentations could be made, except an English merchant,
who was, in the character of a vice consul, acting without
authority, and not possessing the means of protection. He
knew not what were the feelings of the House upon this
subject, but be would detail to them a circumstance which
they could not hear without mingled feelings of disgust
and shame; feelings which he could not help avowing on
witnessing a transaction connected with a subject which
had always been the peculiar boast of this country. Mr.
Appleton, the Charge d'Affaires of America, at Cadiz, felt
it his duty to protest against the detention of two Ameri-
can vessels in that port, and two English Merchants, whose
vessels were in the same predicament, seeing that there
was no authority there to protect their interests, and bay-
ing '
no other resource, went to the American Charge
d'Affaires, and begged of him to extend his protection to
them, and include the detention of their vessels in his pro-
test. So English merchant, were obliged to entreat the
protection of an American Charge d'Affaires against the
conduct of the French ! Was it to be endured that Bri-
tish commerce should be so neglected—that it should have
no protection against the outrage of a foreign nation ?
For America he felt the deepest concern.—Of America,
their brethren, springing from the same origin with them-
selves, he should never speak but with feelings of the
greatest respect and warmest interest. With America and
England, linked together in the bonds of amity and
feeling, he trusted the day would come—for come it would
and he hoped it was not far distant—when the liberty of
the world would find a resting place. Still, though pos-
sessed of these feelings, he, as an Englishman, could not
be free from jealousy at seeing British commerce, when
outraged by France, obliged to fly for protection to an
American Charge d'Affaires. And why was this so—to
what cause could it be attributed ? To none, in his opi-
nion, but that inglorious policy which England had pur-
sued in the late contest between France and Spain. But
this has not been the only result of this policy as it con-
cerned England. Look at the ports of Spain with all
those of strength or commerce in the hands of the French,
and, as lie was credibly informed, French shipi were al-
lowed duty free into all the ports, while every means were
taken to exclude the British, with Malaga, Cadiz. Bar-
celona, and Carthegena, garrisoned by French troops—
Malaga and Carthagena, which were so loqg almost exclu-
sively confined to British commerca—Cadiz, the best situ
ation in Spain for a large navy—Carthagena, the finest
bat bour in that kingdom—so tine, that according to the
Spanish proverb there were but three good harbours in
Spain, Jane, July, and Carthagena—and Barcelona, the
key of Spain ; all these were now in the possession of
France, which made it lamentable to reflect, that all the
blood we had shed to rescue that country from the bands
of the French, in the late wit-, was shed in vain. Even
the contraband trade of Gibraltar was cut off, fur which
alone it was useful to England in time of peace, and the
Family Compact, which had been one of the grounds of
a contest in which this country was formerly engaged,
was again restored on its firmest basis, and all the objects
for which we had ever fought or bled, were gratuitously
abandoned. Let the Constitution have perished—let France
have commenced an unjustifiable aggression—let Liberty
have expired, and the brst blood of Spain had been sited,
still it was the bounden duty of England to have prevented
Spain from becoming a province of France. To this duty
she was called by wisdom, honour, and policy, and it was
because he felt all these had been overlooked—it was be-
cause he felt our interest had been neglected, our engage-
ments abandoned, and our honour tarnished. that lie rose
to move for the production of papers which would furnish
some information upon the subject. There was one docus
ment which he did not include in his motion, as lie was not
aware that it was presented to the Right Hon. Secretary.
It was sent a few days before the surrender of Cadiz, by
the Spanish Government to Admiral Hubert, with a request
that it should be laid before the Foreign Secretary—it was
a protest against the conduct of Sir W. A'Court. If in the
course of his speech he had spoken warmly, be hoped the
House would pardon him, as it was a subject in which his
feelings were deeply interested. The Noble Lord conclu-
ded by moving, " that a bumble Address be presented to
his Majesty, praying that his Majesty be graciously pleas-
ed to direct that copies be laid before the House of all the
instructions sent by his Majesty's Government to Sir W.
A'Court, his lilejristy's Plenipotentiary to the Court of
Spain, with a viewto ascertain his conduct in the late war
between France and Spain. from the period of the first en-
trance of the French troops to Spain, up to the surrender
of Cadiz 1 and also copies of all correspondence between
his Majesty's Plenipotentiary at the Court of Spain, and
the Spanish Government, relative to the mediation of Great
Britain during the same period."

Mr. CANNING said that be merely rose, if he was not
out of order, to answer two questions of the Noble Lord,
without at all intending to go into a speech, and as these
questions related to the conduct of Sir W. A'Court, he would
confine himself to that point. The Noble Lord asked him
if Sir W. A'Court, in his conduct during the late contest
between France and Spain, acted upon the instructions of
his Majesty's Government or his own discretion? His
answer was, that he acted partly on both. Government
endeavoured to foresee the events that might arise, and
instructions were forwarded to Sir Wm. A'Court, with
the view of meeting them. But in case any event should
arise which his Majesty's Government had not foreseen,
Sir WM. A'Court was instructed to act as in his opinion
the occasion might require, his Majesty's Government
placing the fullest assurance on his discretion, and should
any event arise in which he found himself placed in a
situation of doubt or perplexity. he (Mr. Canning) had in-
timated to him the expediency of going to Gibraltar,
where be might still communicate with the Spanish Go-
vermin's'. and from which, after awaiting the instructions
of his Majesty's Government, he might be able to repair
to any place where his presence was deemed necessary.
However, a case did occur. which, as he did not mean
to argue now, be would not qualify—a case which the
wit of man, could not have foreseen, namely, the depo-

*Won of a King for a limited peridd. To have foreseen
such an event, and to have given instructions to meet
it, would indeed have been a higk demand upon the sa-
gacity of Ministers and the faculty of the imagination.
After the King's departure from Seville, Sir William
A'Court waited there for some time for instructions, and
it was true, as stated by the Noble Lord, that an attempt
wa% made by the factious party at Seville, to construe
his residence to party purposes, and make it an instru-
ment of their designs; and it was then that Sir William
A'Court, seeing such a construction put on his remaining
at Seville, teok himself to St. Lucar, and there embarked
for Gibraltar. On the seat of Government quitting that
Place, Sir William A'Court said that he should not follow
it, and intimated to the then Minister of Foreign Affairs,
that he would remain as near as possible in order to com-
municate with the Spanish Government, and with that
view would go to Gibraltar, where he would wait till in-
structions could reach him from his Government ; but if
none came, that be would act upon his own discretion ; thus
—that if his removing to Cadiz would conduce to the per-
sonal safety of the King, or if the King were restored to
the exercise of his functions, ke would go. In the mean-
time instructions went out from Government to Sir W.
A'Court, not to enter a bhickaded place, and he therefore
continued his residence at Gibraltar. In this Sit William
A'Court acted upon the instructions of his Majesty's Go-
vernment, and if any imputation was cast upon them, he
was prepared to justify their conduct, bat would not have
risen now, but that he thought it right to exculpate Sir
W. A'Court from the charge made against him.

Mr. STURGES BOURNE said, that before the House
could assent to the motion of the Noble Lord, they ought
to know the whole extent of the question which it involv-
ed. It was nothing less than charging the King's Go-
vernment with being guilty of a breach of neutrality in
the late contest between France and Spain, and he must
confess that this was the first time he heard such an imputa-
tion cast upon them. He did not expect that the Noble
Lord would have stamped the policy which this country
bad adopted in that contest with such epithets as lee had
used. The Noble Lord stigmatised that policy as inglo-
rious, but with what justice that epithet was used, the
House must be aware, when it was acknowledged from one
end of the country to the other, that the exertions of Go-
vernment to prevent a war and preserve the blessings of
pearewere highly beneficial to the interests of the country
Could it be forgotten that if we hail engaged in that war we
would have had almost all our allies ranged against us, and
lighted up a general war in Europe. in addition to our hav-
ing to combat, as the event justified Ilains in saying, with
the great part of the population of Spain ? He would just
take the liberty of making a few conjectures on what
would be the probable consequence of our making common
cause with Spain. If they had engaged in that contest,
they must have acted either as principals or auxiliaries,
and in either case they would have to fight in the field with
such men as Abisbal. Ballasteros, and Ilorillo. But, he
asked, would an English Army act under the command of
that consummate General who brought the former war to so
glorious a termination ? Experience would tell them.—
It would be recollected, that after the battle of Salamanca,
as late as 1512, when the Duke of Wellington was no no•
vice in Spain, and had already rescued from the grasp of
France a great part of what she bad obtained either by vio-
lence or fraud—when in the full tide of victory. and that
he had been invested with the chief command of the Spa-
nish Government—at that moment, when a man of princi-
ple or intergrity would have been only inspired with in-
creased zealßallasteros abandoned the cause of his country,
and so crippled the operations of the Misrule, army. that
in consequence of that defection, Soult wintered in dladrid
instead of the Duke of Welliagton. Did the Noble Lord
think that the same spirit of disaffection would not have
manifested itself if we had again made common cause with
Spain, particularly when circumstances were more favour-
able to it front the divided state of Spain? It was hardly
necessary for hint to trespass further upon the house, fur
they must all be aware how disadvantageous it would be to
carry on a war under such circumstances and with such
Commanders. Indeed, there was but one opinion on the
subject from one end of the country to the other, and it was
in vain to dwell longer upon it. He would now come to the
charges of the noble Lord against Sir W. A'Court for a
breach of neutrality, and he could not help expressing his
astonishment at the causes assigned for that imputed breach.
The first accusation was, that Sir William A'Court did not
proceed to Cadia with the Spanish Government. and this
the Noble Lord gravely called a breach of neutrality. This
part of the charge was answered in one word. Sir William
A'Court was appointed Ambassador to the King of Spain.
Such was the purport of his credentials. The King of
Spain was seised at Seville and deposed. This being the
case Sir William A'Court's credentials became inoperative.
and he could recognise no other power without fresh in-
structions. This, if any thing, was rather a proof of neu-
trality; if Sir William A'Court had acted otherwise, his
Majesty's Government would not have done their duty if
they had not recalled him. The King of Spain being de-
pond —whether right or wrong, was not now the question,
the existence of a King ceased, and Sir William A'Court
went to Gibraltar, where an application was made to him
on the part of the Spanish Government for his mediation.
The second accusation of the Noble Lord—and which in-
deed was the weakest part of the charge of a breach of
neutrality—was that he gave advice to a distinguished Spa-
nish trenerel—a man whom he believed merited all the
encomiums passed on hino.Whether the advice which he gave
to General Alan was discreet or indiscreet, he knew not,
but that advice might have been given more as a private
friend, than in his official capacity as Minister, and in any
case, he did not see bow it could be construed to a breach of
neutrality. The third ground of the Noble Lord's charge
was, that this country allowed the blockade of Cadiz. Was
a third power to prevent two belligerent powers from exer-
cising the right of blockade, and above all was it in that
house f Was it before the British Parliament. which had
always so strictly maintained the right of blockade between
two Belligerent powers,—(hear,) that our abstaining from
interference, could be. brought forward as an argument to
support a Wench of neutrality? Let them be honourable and
honest at the same time, and not sacrifice principle to con-
venience. He was aware that the Noble Lord might draw
the distinction that Cadiz was the seat of Government,
but he should recollect that the possestioa of it was there-
fore more important to the enemy. The Noble Lord's
doctrine upon this was quite new ;.and certainly this coun-
try was the last which should question the right of block-
ade. As to the interference of the American Charge
d'Affaires to which the Noble Lord alluded, it was a mete
act of courtesy on his part. These were the three grounds
upon which the Noble Lord called for most important do-
cuments, in which were contained the secret instructions of
Government to oar foreign Ministers. His reasons for the
production of these papers were so slights that be knew
they could not be induced to consent to his motion, and lay
them before the house, which would, in fact, be laying
them before alt Europe. If there was really a breach of
neutrality, both the house and the country must have
known it ; and in that case the Noble Lord would have
been justified in calliugfor 'the papers in question ; but at
the present he bad not the slightest pretence fur their pro-
duction. It was worth while to examine the course of our
neutrality, and see what disposition his Majesty's Govern-
ment had to violate it towards Spain. How did our neu-
trality commence? Did it not commence with a commu-
nication to Spain, that this country had determined to be
neutral, while we concealed it from France. Was not
this, if any thing, rather a proof of partiality to Spain?
This country then tenaered its mediation, which was re-
fused. It afterwards offered its counsel, but it was onfor-
tuaately rejected, though be believed there was no man
who beard him, who would not now say, that Spain would

have hada freer and a better Constitution, if it 11.1.1. kec
accepted.—(Hear, hear.)—These circumstance, did no%
however, prevent Sir Wm. A'Court from still tendering
his services; but his efforts were unfortunately of no avail.
In preserving a strict neutrality, Government had many
difficulties to contend with, one of which was the military
spirit that had grown up in this country, and the disposi,
tton to assist the Spaniards, which bad induced some of
his Majesty's subjects to engage in actual hostilities with
France. In his opinion Governinent bad pursued a manly
and straight forward course, of which both the house and
the country approved, and it was under that conviction
that he would m lye as an amendment—"'That the house
is duly sensible of the advantages derived to the country
from the neutrality in the late contest between France and
Spain, which his Majesty declared it his determination to
observe; and that it appears to this house that under cit..
camstances of great perplexity and difficulty, that oeutrl.
lity had been inviolably observed."

After some pause, the gallery was ordered to be cleared
for a division, when

Lord NUGENT rose to reply. The Noble Lord
otr,sraeitll.
*bat he had only two words to offer in reply to the oh.
"servations of the Honourable Member who spoke last. He
thought that the Right Honourable Gentleman had mis-
taken the drift of what he (Lord Nugent) iwi
As to the amendment, it is nothing more than a recogni-
tion of the vote of last year, approving of the &termination
of Government in observing a strict neutrality. He had
no right to quarrel with the Right Honourable Gentleman
forditfering in opinion with him, but still he did not think
that he was very satisfactory in some of his arguments.
The Right Honourable Gentleman supposed that the me-
diation offered last year was simply an offer of mediation,
resting on the disposition of Spain to change her Govern-
ment according to the views of our Government; hut this
he believed was not the case. if he was COIT,Ctiy in.
formed, and he believed he was, the offer was areefold.
The first she was partly ready to consent to; the second,
consistently with her honour, she could not agree to; and
the third she could not accept, consistently with her Con-
stitution. The first was the recognition of the independ-
ence of the Spanish South American provinces. The se•
cond was, that the Spanish Government should provide
fo r the safety of the King and the Royal Family. Now, as
no violence or menace had been offered to either, bow
could Spain consistently with her honour assent to a pro-
position which would imply an undeserved imputation.—
file third was one which a British House of Com-
mons must acknowledge to be impossible, namely—that
the Spanish Government should promise that the nest
Cortes would undertake to modify the Constitution. He
would only put to the House, with their knowledge of
what a free and deliberate assembly was, if such a pledge
could be given. It was stated by the Right Honourable
Secretary, that as soon as Sir William A'Court discovered
the use the factions at Seville were making of his residence
there, that he went to St. Loran and embarked for
Gi-
braltar; but it was known that he remained there three
weeks ar•er the Constitutional Government had left it;
amongst the Army of the Faith and the French troops, till
the blockade and investment of Cads was completed, and
then only an offer of mediation was made; and when an ap.
plication was made to him to him to go to Cadis for that
purpose, be replied that it was now too late, Cadis being
blockaded and closely invested. But, he would ask, what
bad Sir William A'Court been doing for three weeks
within the walls of Seville, and in the midst of a hostile
army? Could not he have gone to Cadiz during that in-
terval? In the debate, nothing had fallen to convince him
that be had not stated strong grounds for the production
of the documents called for; but, in case his motion was
rejected, which was but too probable, he should feel it his
duty to move a Resolution, merely to record his opinion
upon the Journals of the House. He would not trouble
the House long with it, as he did not mean to accompany
it with any observation. _ _

The gallery was then cleared for a division-4°r the
original motion, 30—For the amendment, 171—Majority
against the motion, 141.
During our absence from the gallery, we understood
Lord Nugent moved his Resolution, which was negatived
without a division.

On our return to the gallery we found the House in Com.
mittee on the Irish Law Courts Bill. The resolutions
were agreed to, and the report was ordered to be received
to-morrow.

The House resumed, and the Report of the Committee of
Supply was brought up.

PROMOTION IN TUB N•/l.

Sir G. COCKBURN rose for the impose of observing
that in consequence of what fell from the Honourable
Member for Aberdeen last night, respecting the promo-
tion of Masters of the Navy, be wonld take the liberty of
giving some explanation. The Hon. Gentleman then re-
quested him to prove his assertions as to the actual provi-
sion of the Order in Council. He had, in consequence of
that wish, brought down the Order in Council, and with
the permission of the House would take the liberty of
reading an extract from it. He begged, however, in
candour to the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, to state that he
(Mr. Hume) was led into error by not having the proper
papers, or complete information before him. The Order in
Council was dated the 15th August, 1805, and amended
ea order made on the 17th January, 1883. It was to the
effect of correcting it, as far as regards the examination of
persons to serve as Lieutenants. who have been employed
us Masters, and served as Masters, and enacted that such
persons should be eligible to promotion from meritorious
conduct ; although the individual who bad so distinguished
himself e not rated as Mate or Midshipman, provided he
had performed a service at sea for six years. Such was
the tenor of the Order in Council, which he bad referred
to last night, and he trusted that the House would see that
his assertions were borne out by the document itself.

Mr. HUME said it was necessary for him to state what
the facts of the case really were. In the last year, re-
presentations were made to him on the subject of promo-
tion in the navy, and a copy of an Order in Council wt)
put icto his band. In the absence of all official intona-
tion on the subject, he thought the best way to remove all
doubts, was to move for documents, which he then did.
Agreeably to that motion, papers were laid on the table,
and a copy of the order in Council among others, which be
then held in his hand. and quoted from last night. He
submitted therefore to the House, that a similar state-
' went which be made last year, to that of last night, hav-
ing passed unnoticed, whether any neglect was attribut-
able to him ? He did not not mean to say that the docu-
ment now produced by the gallant Admiral was witbilld
intentionally. The Honourable Baronet said last night that
if be (Mr. H.) read further of the Order, be would hive
found the proviso in that document, but it appeared not to
have existence There, but in another order. ile hoped,
however, the return he had moved for, would shew that
the exception had been acted on, and that more that) one
or two individuals had received the benefit of the proviso
in the Order.

TO-MORROW MORNING, TWO OUT OF THE SEVEN
200,000 PRIZES WILL RE DECIDED IN THE FIRST
FIVE MINUTES.