The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-04-17 00:00:00

e qua

t that
44 bit

advantageous to Europe that the House of Bourbon should
he set up in France; but he did not understand that the
expression of such an opiction could make him responsible
for the debt.
Dr. LUSH INGTON said that if it were blameable in a
man to abandon principles which he had once energetically
maintained, there 'was no one against whom the imputation
could be made with more justice than the Hon: Gent. who
just sat down. He did not accuse the Hon. Gent. but he
must say that he was the first instance in his knowledge of
a person of great abilities and tried integrity, who bad coo:-
pletely fors-ken the sentiments which he had once so stre-
nuously advocated and become a convert to the opinions of
his bitterest antagonists. What must be thought of him
who would disc.inrage demonstrations of public opinion be-
couse he supposed they placed a responsibility on those who
o were parties to such a declaration. What must be thought
him who would advance such a slavish doctrine as this—
Hat when ell the atrocities and abominations of French po-
licy were laid open. the people of England were not to ex-
' press their communion with the sentiments of the oppressed.
•and thrlr indignation sgainst the oppressor. Good Goal
were we now to couch and truckle to a Bourbon! What!
had Coateaubrlatol reduc dus so low as this? Were the
mouths of the people of England to be stopped, and were
they to go in mourning for the sins of other countries? But
the lion. Gent. wished to cotitroul the expressions of indig-
nation in that ilo..se. This was the first time it was ever
b ddly asserted that the representatives of the people should
be 'ilea lest their opinions should give offence. It was,
perljape, expedient that Ministers, in the course of diplo-
inetic business, snoeld use the language of courtesy ; but in
that House, he trusted lie should,never see env attempt suc-
cessful to eneek the honest declaration of feeling, thongh all
toe despots of' Europe were leagued together to vent their
rage upon the coulsry. With respect to Ike measure before
the House. Its cmcurred with the Noble Lord in opinion
that the Bill aright be repealed without violating our neu-
trality, Tact such a measure would be regarded in France
. as a testii 1111 l ty of our abhorrence of its conduct. he was
really to 'admit. lie he loved it would be conceded that
a' Foreign State had nil sight to remonstrate with the Minis-
ter of a et.entry against any measures for its internal regu-
lation, snd if a Foreign Power should ask the Right 110-
uouraole Gentlemen+ opposite for the reason why the Bri
tish Parliament bad adopted * particular measure, he would
be disposed to say that the Forelen Power had no right to
offer any opinion upon the measures of the Parliament,
onlese it could be shown that they involved a breach of neu-
t silty. He shout I like to know by what authority it was
stated Cott a lowing a Power at warwith another to per-
.chase ships' stores !eons us, and even periuittiug our sub-
Ina to Who io the service Of that power, was a breach of
rentolat). Bit this Bill not only contravened this
principle, hut It prevented a native of England, though
twenty years living from this country, from enter-
iv; into a foreign service, under the penalties of
a misdemeanour. Had not England the sunjects of
all nations in her service/ Was there not even a' Statute
la exist: nee, wl,i it gave the benefit of neturaliaatiou
to a foreigner, who had been employed 'for two years
sieving a time of war in the service of•Grest Britain. %Vas
It not the practice that *hen boead by treaty to furnish
gyms,: men, and stores. • nation has continued to furnish
• ' Saom after the war had broken out. By allowing to both
toat'lles tile same rights end privileges, there could br no
livaaeli of id utrality. The Bill was.suost hostile to the
• • felivinos aid interests of the country. It was a.l a little
.intelar that this Bill was passed at the reni,ustrance of
Spain, lit.orsier to prevent us front assistiug Spanish Colo-
nine front wetting their independence. %Vnat was tile'
consequence I That very tneasore returned upon tile
head of Spain, for it was the great Abstacle to this cum-
, try Riving her assistance in the hour of necessity. No far
• is fill judgment went, he thought the line most becoming
' this country was Cott of hostility. It was not in feeling,
but in prinoinile.t not he would recominetid this country going
to war. A war should not only be just, but the country
Pltftui4l be able to any that it was so expedient, as that we
• could not staid it without abandoning our honour and intr-
. rest*. Torre was no reason whatever for believing that we
could escap-. going to war. As it appeared to him we should
en to war with greater chance of success, before the force
of Spain wee broken, and before France hail gone so far as
to leave us the tusk, not of defending. but of conquering.
He did not deny that n defansitos treaty with Portugal did
not oblige us to go to assist her in an offensive war. But
Inc might very well say to herself—" If I lie by until Spain
• IA conquered by the French, it will not be in the power of
Great Britain to save me. lie was persuaded that the
country was is a situation to go to war.
Dr. PHILLIMOKE, after deprecating the length to
which a discussion bad been tarried on a matter which
• slight be reserved for a subsequent occasion, proceeded
to argue io favour of the propriety of the Bill, both with
a view to the eneient 14w and practice of this country and
the law of nations. The Right Hon. Gentleman con-
elnded by saying that it would he inexpedient and unad-
visable to repeal this lair, under the existing circum-
stances in Europe.
Mr. MARE) A'f T considered the law to hiunfair, and
inconsistent with the liberty of the subject, bee:time every
man bad a right to follow what profession he pleased.—
Some pursued commerce, others, fired with martial ardour,
rushed to take up the profession of arms, and no obstacle
should be thrown in his eav, unless the circumstances
were strong and urgent. gonourable Gedtlemen should
recollect, bat we have now determined to be neutral—and
in his opinion wisely, but it would infringe on that
neutrality if we were to repeal it now, when it would
"give an advantage to one of the belligerents. When
peace came, the proper moment would arrive fur re-
pealing it.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, the Hon. Gentleman who
'had just sat down.adopted rather a singular lire of argu-
*neut. Though lie thought the measure inconsistent
with the principles of liberty, yet he wonlil not repeol it,
because it inmail he useful to a gallant people. The Hon.
Gent. would consent to a repeal of the Bill when it could
be of use to no one, but he would not repeal it when it
would confer incalculable benefits on a people contending
for liberty, by allowing them to have the aid of th ise
Englishmen who might feel disposed to assist them. 'l'he
Learoed Civilian (Dr. Philliniore) went into a lung deta I
to show that this law was conformable to the law of Eng-
land, but the principal authority upon which he restrd
his ease was Beutersheek, an autism ity which he (Lord
Jelin) denied; and be regretted the absence of his lion.
and Learned Friend, the Member for Knaresborough,
who, on a former occasion, showed how cautiously such
in authority; oaten to be received. He denied the va-
lidity of any
.iyhaeh was not a British authority, tt lien
brought funvarsdio counteract the practice of ages. The
Hon. Menibur for Herefordshire hail advanced nothing
riemsm the *object; what he said about war and peace
anight be found in every book of rhetoric. In alluding
to the dangerous conseqiiences of eloquence, and its being
frequently the cane of war, the lion. Gentleman was not,
very lot tunate in the instance which he adduced. The
eloquence of Mr. Wedderburne, on per suing the Ann4ican
war, was on an occasion totally dilf.trent from the present.
The two cams admitted n.. c parison. That war was ,
undertaken to suppress liberty, arid Mr. Wedderburne
put forth his eloquence in support of that war, as the
paid advocate of the Croon. The Hon. Gentleman said,
that lie supported this Incas-ire becamie he reflood with
centi' ence on the superior information of Ministers,
which convinced theta of its necessity, butt he would take
the liuerty of telling die Bight lion. tient., that this was
no new confidence, for in 1019 lie soppor ed the restric-
tions of the liberty of the subject on the same ground ;
hut as for his part, he would not trust to the superior in-
forma•ion of alinis:ers, even for their own sakes, because
• if he did, lie must think much worse of them. If lie
were to believe them to hare been well informed, and to
have acted as it appeared by the ilorumeine on the talihs
they hail done, he must believe them to have acted with
Lai faith. if they were well informed, and knew when
they sent out Lard Fitzroy Ss/invert to prevail upon the
Spaniards to agree to a modification of the Constitution,
t at the Frei.ch Ambassador was at the time holding oat
as an Indwoengent to Spain to agree to the modification-,
that they could secretly provoke Eogl•inil to a war for
the Inure easy reeovery of the Colonies if, lie said, they

E

Jsad known this. thy mut certainly have acted with liddi
faith. He would now come to the subject more insole.
/timely befor.h the House. It was not denied that it was
the cnstom,of the Kings of England to allow their subjects
to enter the service of foreign countries; but then it was

said, that the only instances which occurred, were when
Protestant States were contending against Catholic States,
and therefore it was not a ftir case. If it were fair to

allow subjects to assist other countries in the cause of re-
ligion, why not equally fair to allow them in the cau e of
liberty? Ogren Elisabeth, who perhaps understood how
to role better than any Sovereign since her time, seeing '
tue Protestants.contending against the Catholics, parti-
cularly in the Netherlands, though she professed unity
and friendship with that country, yet allowed her sub-
jects to assist the Proteetants•, and at the very time she
was holding this language. Mr. North, the son of Lord ,
North, and Mr. Norris, the son of Lord Norris, were sc..'
tually serving in the Netherlands. The Noble Lord here
referred to a declare: ion made by the Queen, stating the
grounds upon which she permitted her subjects to assist
the Protestants, and proceeded to say that the Queen even
went further than permitting her subjects to give assist.'
ante, because she seat money herielf to the Netherlands,
while the relations of peace existed. And s,l the saw
time she said in the declaration, " We acquaint the King
that we continue in friendly relations with him ; but see-
ing what has been done by Spain iti Naples, we feel it
lour duty to weaken his power in the Netherlands." He
would now compare the declarations of the Allies on the
*Woof Spain with this. In May 11120, the Emperor of
Russia issued the first mani:esto, and laid down the fun-
damental principle, which as was observed by the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of Foreign Affairs, struck
at the root of the British Constitution, „That the King
was the only conservating power, and that institutiOns
emanating from any other source, engendered a new
chaos." Then came the declaration from the Court of
Berlin ; the one fio n Lavhach followeJ ; andlaist eras the
declaration of the King of France, all upholding similar
doctrines. This clearly proved that the cent st was now
between the cause of deapostism, and the cause of liberty,
as much as relieinn was the ground of contemnation
at the time of the Reformation. Then why prevent, in the
cause of liberty, what Was sanctioned by the wisest of our
Sovereigns in the cause of religion? We cannot lose
sight, that the liberty of England was ultimately aimed at
by the Allies, for they welt knew; that the liberty of Eng-
land was the great temptation ; the great model which
was hell out to refer bin nations ; and that as long as
that Was secure, their despoeition was in danger. There-
fore the same interesteand the saute reason which prompt-
ed Queen Elizabeth to assist the Netherlands, should •
now prompt them to assist the cause of liberty in Spain,
by repealing this Bid, and permitting English subjects to
eater the Spatial) service. He denied that the repeal of
this law would he a violation of neutrality, because no
country could jnativ accuse them of restoring the law to
what it had been before 1819. Let Government do what
they would, the heart of the country would not he neu-
tral, and they ought therefore leave the generous feelings
of humanity to their free exercise, by the repeal of this
13111.
Mr. T. COURTENA Y said, that the conduct of Eli-
zabeth towards the Netherlands was not a fair case,
cause she only wished fur that war which afterwards
followed. he perfectly concurred in the arguments
of the Hon. Member for Sandwich (Mr. Marryatt), be-
cause we could scarcely disguise from ourselves, that
Spain would he the Power benefitted by a repeal of this
law, and it would therefore he an unfair proceeding to-
wards France. If it were repealed, it would in fact be a
decl tration to France that 'se were prepared to take a
part in the wee.
Sir R. WI LSON said, that nothing had occurred since
this Bill had passed, to change his opinion on it, that it
was both unjust and impolitic ; unjust because it oper-
ated to prejudice the oppressed. and impolitie because it
operated to prevent the progress of independence abroad.
0. as bad been stated by the Honoured and Learned
Gentleman (Dr. Phillimore), it was an offence at com-
mon law to enlist in a foreign service, why was not
the offence left to the'cominon law? His complaint was,
that a statute was made against the Crown law.—The
Act had originally been called for by the despotic Go-
vernment of Spain, but now its repeal was called for by
the Constitutional Government of that country. But it
appeared that the Hon. Member for Hereford (Mr. Lamb)
objected to subscriptions for the Spaniards as an offence
that ought to he pnnishe.i. This now was going further
than the despot of Russia had ventured to go, in the case
of the Greeks, when he forbid his subjects from espous-
ing their cause. The Hon and Gallant Member then
went on to comment on the severity 'of the law, and said
he was prepared, at the expense of any personal sacri-
fice, to assist the cause of Spain so far as he possibly
could. He contended tf the sear should continue, that
the day was nut far distant, when the standard of Spain
would be seen placed by the side of the standard
of England. It was quite impossible that the people
of this country coal.' look passively on and see Spain
sacrifice I.
Sir J. YORKE was not disposed to depart from the
strict principle of neutrality which this country ought
to n.ainfain, and which could not be maintained if this
Bill were repealed: He insisted if the seamen of tbis
country were allowed to go into the service of Foreign
Powers, there would soon be such a flight of them across,
the water, as would occasion a very great paucity of that
fisateriel.—(A laugh.) —lle found from a paragraph in
one of the newspapers (and newspapers sometimes told
truth), that 300 seamen nd recently embarked at Liver-
pool,
to enter the navy of the Emperor of the Breeds.
Now he would rather see the Ministers, and even the
Right lion. Gentleman in the Chair, want their salaries,
than that the Navy should be injured.. He would leave
it to others to draw their arguments from Puffendori
and Grotiue. and split hairs upon them. He would only
say in the language of Holy Writ, " Do unto others as'
you would be done hy."
Mr. It. GURNEY said a few words against the repeal ;
he believe 4 it would operate by the fitting out of ships of
war, under British owners or hellish seamen, to the pro-
motion of piracy.
31r. It. RAIUNG supported the motion. He assured the
House. that he would be the last man to vote for it, if he
saw that it would lead to the slightest chance of involving
the c try in war. He did nut see, however, why the
Powers on the Continent ought to be so fastidious on the
subject. As to the argument of the Hon. and Gallant Ad-
miral (Sir J. Yorkel that there was a great emigration of
seamen to the Brazils, it went for nothing, as in spite of the
law seamenwould eater into Foreign Powers. Besides, the
House would recollect. that in all periods of our history,
both our seamen end .Naval Officers had gone into the ser-
vice of Foreign States. Admiral Gregg, Admiral Elphin-
stone, and others, hid taken commends in the service of
the Empress Catherine ; hut afterwer.ls, when there were
tome apprehensions of a wrr between thii country and
Russia, they iminediat-ly retuned home, as did also the
British semilel, who were with them. and who were the
more valuable es having, while they were absent, acquired
considerable experience. The lion. Member then advert-
ed to the papers that had liven laid before the House, and
contended that Ministers had evinced neither earnestness nor
resolution in their policy. He never rend any papers with
more pain. or which he thought more discreditable to the
Govern nem, than those which the Right lion. Gent. (Mr.
enduing) had preseettd. If we had to deal with such touchy
Allie 4, it was for us to act as we thought expedient without
consulting them.
Mr: W. WY HS opposed the motion, and maintained that,
by the oft law of the lend, the raising of troops for the ser-
vice of Foreign it ltigerents was penal. The repeil of the
Bill would lead to one eittang out of privateers is British
ports: which would be highly odensive to Foreign Powers.
It would not been easy matter t 3 bring back Officers from
foreign service by proclamation; for unless actually Cain-
alCLICA, there was uo positive power to compel:lmM, Con-