place letter, in which were a great number of words of course, ending with "I have the honour to be, Sir, with the highest respect, your devoted humble servant," when, in fact, the writer felt none of that respect and devotion of which he talked. To debate the Address, paragraph by paragraph, would take up the whole of the session. Many of the topics treated of in the Address, would require mature deliberation; and as to the Spanish war, he thought it would be best discussed when the Chancellor of the Exchequer should come to the House for supplies. Lord Castlereagh agreed entirely with the last speaker, but wished to correct a statement made by an hon. and learned gentleman, that the government of this country had at any period conceded the right of the Americans to insist on the repeal of the Orders in Council. one, then by another; at length up started the late Treasurer of the Navy, (Mr. Rose) whom he might denominate the patriarch of the Treasury Bench, and who chose to disclaim all idea of a tax on capital, which he threw upon a right reverend bishop, many hundred miles off. If it really was the natural child of the right reverend prelate, he thought it very hard to throw it at his door, under such circumstances. The hon. gentleman then proceeded to detail the occurrences of his political life, and repelled the attack made on him by Mr. Stephen, whom he designated as the author and supporter of the Orders in Council-he who eulogised them while living, and lamented them when dead.➡ He stated, in reply to Mr. Wilberforce, that the petition for peace carried in that House, was at the close of the American war, when the, distressed manufacturers burst the doors of the House, and by a reMr. Whitbread wished to say a few cital of their distresses obtained the peti words in reply to what had fallen from the tion. Mr. Burke was then the eloquent hon. and learned member opposite, and but unsuccessful advocate of peace-deaf also from the late member for Yorkshire, was the parliament !-deaf were the miwho had honoured him with the appella- nisters !-deaf was the prince!-that war, tion of friend. The hon. and learned so obstinately persevered in, ended in the gentleman opposite had informed them, independence of America, and its consethat a day would be appointed for consi- quences were now visiting us. He denied dering the American question; and as the that he was (as he had been characterised) hon. and learned gentleman had returned a man who wished to drag his country to to that House unchanged, he would ven- the feet of France, and asserted, that he ture to predict that it would not be a short had ever acted on principle, and during the day. The hon. and learned gentleman had whole course of the war had been the contold them, that he had employed his pen sistent advocate of peace. The hon. genand tongue in support of the Orders in tleman next adverted to the Amendment Council: his pen he had employed before which he had proposed on the preceding he entered parliament, and no doubt that evening, and which, he contended, had pen had gained him his seat; and that he been misunderstood; as it did not call on had used his tongue subsequently to his the Prince Regent to enter into an immebeing in parliament, the House could diate negociation for peace; but to cause abundantly testify. It appeared singular, an enquiry to be made as to the feelings however, that the hon. and learned gen- of the enemy on that point. He then tleman, who spoke on every subject, stated, in allusion to what fell from Mr. should have been silent the day that his Ponsonby on the preceding evening, the darling offspring, the Orders in Council, various occasions on which the subject of breathed their last; but so it was. He had negociations with France had been before heard that the marquis of Wellington had the House, and the conduct he had puronce been employed to prevent a certain sued. Although he had delivered his opiright hon. doctor (Duigenan) from speak- nion on those occasions, he never had, being; and as he had observed a noble lord fore last night, submitted any specific proseated by the hon. and learned gentleman position on the question. But now, when during the debate to which he alluded, he he saw an opportunity occur most favourhad no doubt that his employment was able for this country, and when he saw no precisely similar to that of the noble mar- manifestation in the speech from the quis. He had been very anxious to hear throne, of a desire to seize that opportuthe right hon. the Chancellor of the Ex-nity, he conceived it right that parliament chequer; but as often as he had attempted should interfere. They must all recollect, to rise, he had been prevented, first by that the speeches from the throne during the last 20 years, contained, in general, a passage, expressive of a desire to conclude a peace with France, and with all the world, if it could be procured on terms commensurate with the safety and dignity of the country. But now there was a total silence on that point; and he wished to prevent that bare and naked exposition of the state of the country, he wished to prevent those distresses which the war had, and must continue to produce,-being blazoned throughout Europe; he wished to save the country from being placed in a similar situation to that in which she had been plunged by the repeal of the Orders in Council, when it was too late-and this could only be effected by a timely pacification. No man was more ready than himself to endure privations for the public good; no man would feel more repugnance in endeavouring to prevent the people from making any sacrifice which tended to uphold the honour of the country; but when he saw the government placed in hands which his right hon. friend (Mr. Ponsonby) was not himself disposed to support when he saw a government possessing power, but without confidence when he saw the infatuation which prevailed in the country, from the period of Mr. Fox's motion, in 1793, for opening a negociation with France, down to the present hour, he thought he acted correctly in endeavouring to check the evil. He wished the Prince Regent to be informed of the true state of the country, before fresh exactions were placed on the people, that measures might be devised to prevent their necessity. Many opportunities would occur for the consideration of the Spanish question. He agreed with the hon. gentleman (Mr. Robinson) as to the improved situation of our army on the peninsula now, compared with what it was at the end of the last campaign. But, when he spoke of the importance of raising the siege of Cadiz, and of the retreat of Caffarelli, a question arose, which every Englishman was anxious to ask; "What has Spain done" To answer this, circumstances must be noticed, which one would fain forget. Let us look to lord Wellington's gazetted account of the battle of Salamanca. We there find units, tens, hundreds, and thousands of slain and wounded, on each side; while the Spanish loss is reduced to six! He should be glad to have this circumstance properly explained. 'Lord Wellington had spoken of the Guerillas as being very active; and, he be lieved, that was all that could be said. As partisans, they might do mischief to the enemy, and he was afraid they also an noyed the population themselves; but to look to them for any great effort, if the English army were removed, was to encourage a vain imagination, in which there was no hope. Buonaparté was at present in a perilous situation, and every exertion ought to be made, by taking advantage of it, to procure a peace. But a feeling seemed to pervade the minds of certain persons, that a peace should not be concluded with that man-a feeling which he wished to eradicate from this country; for, in the probable course of events, we should be obliged to make peace with him. Let him, then, be sent to, openly and manfully; the fate of the mission would be speedily known; and the issue would be, a conviction on the minds of every one, whether a permanent and honourable peace could be procured or not. The Chancellor of the Exchequer wished to make a few observations on what had fallen from some of the preceding speakers. An hon. gentleman had alluded to the expenditure of 1809. In that year, the bills drawn from the peninsula on this country amounted to 2,800,000l. In the present year they amounted to 11,500,000l. So much for the comparative expenditure of the war during these two years; and so much in answer to those who imagined that government had not made the most strenuous exertions in support of the war in the peninsula. In answer to the assertion of an hon. gentleman (Mr. Creevey) who said he had read all the king's speeches to parliament, and that in all of them mention was made of the commerce and revenue of the country, he would mention that in the years 1809 and 1807, no reference whatever was made to the state of the revenue or commerce. With respect to the allusions to a tax on capital, which he was said to have announced, he begged leave to recommend to the attention of the hon. gentleman who charged him with this, the treatise of Dean Swift on Political Lying. He never declared that a tax on capital was to be proposed. All that he said was, that such a measure had been resorted to in other countries; in Holland, Switzerland and Hamburgh for example, and that he believed it might be practicable in this country; but he stated, that he was far from thinking that we had arrived at such an emergency as made this scheme necessary here. An hon. gentleman (Mr. Whitbread) had thought proper to say, that we were beaten at sea by the Americans, because one ship of inferior force had been taken by another of superior; and a right hon. gentleman (Mr. Canning) had stated that our commerce had been swept from the ocean by the Americans. With respect to our commerce, he had to state, that till the accounts from all the out-ports could be obtained, which was impossible till the end of the year, a correct estimate could not be formed of it. However, to judge from the port of London, where a great proportion of the trade of the country was carried on, the inference would be highly favourable. In the first ten months of last year, the exports from the port of London, in official value, amounted to eight millions and a half, and in the first ten months of the present year, they exceeded thirteen millions, a greater sum than for the same period of any former year, except 1809, which was the greatest ever known. No doubt the interruption of the American trade was severely felt in many parts of the country; but it would be matter of great triumph to Mr. Gallatin, if at the commencement of Congress he could give such an account of the commerce of America. In the amount of the revenue of last year, there was only a deficiency of 90,000l. a very small sum indeed in a total of sixty millions. Mr. W. Smith said, the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated, as a matter of triumph, that 11,500,000l. had been expended in the peninsular war, in the last eleven months, while in 1809, only 2,800,000l. had been expended for the same purpose. He, however, must observe, that the depreciation of currency was not quite so great in 1809 as in 1812; and he believed the quantity of gold and silver exported in the latter year, would account for a considerable portion of the increased sum. The same remark, he believed, might be made with respect to the deficiency of the revenue. As they went on, they would find that 60 millions this year, would not be equal to 60 millions in the last. Nor would they find 60 millions in the next year, equivalent to the same sum now; and, instead of a deficiency of 90,000l. they would see it continually increasing. Mr. Canning wished to restate part of the opinions delivered by him on the preceding evening, which had been miscon(VOL. XXIV.) ceived. He did not complain of the government for not issuing letters of marque, but of the absence of all maritime military efforts against the coast of America at an early period of the war. Had sufficient armaments been seasonably stationed off the American ports, all the American vessels would have been hermetically sealed up in those ports. He did not mean to say, as had been supposed, that the whole of our commerce had been swept away by the maritime efforts of America. What he meant to say was, that the captures by the Americans were greater in an infinite proportion than they ought to have been, considering the disproportion between our ships and theirs. The Chancellor of the Exchequer seemed to have forgot his logic when he thought that this charge was answered by an amount of the exports from the port of London; for the amount of those exports by no means indicated their arrival at their place of destination. His charge against the government for not publishing a counter-declaration to that issued by America, on the subject of captain Henry's supposed mission, was also unanswered. The American declaration stood recorded in the face of the world, and the government had not done the country justice in not stating the denial in a manner equally public. Why was such a counter-declaration withheld? Because, said the noble lord, of its being irritable matter. This was humiliation with a vengeance, if the Americans were to be allowed to publish such a charge, and we were not to answer them for fear of irritating them. Much had been said in the course of the evening, on the subject of peace. He believed there existed in the government of France, a determination to pull down this country from the situation which she held in Europe; and therefore we had not only to contend with our other difficulties, but also with that permanent hostility of sentiment, which was not alone directed against our warlike power, but against our very existence as a nation. It was dangerous, therefore, to throw out among the people that peace was easy of attainment. Great distress certainly existed in the country, though it had been greatly exaggerated; but a warning ought to be taken from the pro ceedings previous to the repeal of the Orders in Council, not to hold out hopes which might only end in disappointment. He wished to know from the noble lord what was the real situation of this country (K) answer. with respect to America? He had listened | ciation, or that the necessity of peace was attentively to the noble lord's speech of so urgent, that it became the duty of the last night; but if any person this morning House to interfere. Now, if the first ashad asked him whether we were at war sumption were true, it would not be safe with America, or whether there was a ne- or constitutional to address the throne to gociation with that power, or whether the seek for peace; the Address ought to be war or the negociation predominated, he for the removal of ministers. On the could not have given him a satisfactory other hand, if ministers were as ready as they stated themselves, to enter into a negociation, the ground of an Address must be, that they mistook the situation of the country, and did not see the necessity of making peace, even if they could, and that, therefore, the House must interpose. He did not think the country was in that situation; and, however mitigated the form of Address might be, if they interfered at all with the known prerogative of the crown, it would be telling the enemy that the distresses of the country called for peace. He, therefore, could not conof the constitution, not having that insent to deviate from the ordinary system formation which the cabinet ministers alone possessed. Lord Castlereagh conceived the statement he made on the former evening, with respect to our situation with America, could not have been misunderstood; it was neither more nor less than a state of unqualified warfare. As to a counter declaration, it would have been improper to issue it until an answer was returned by America to the repeal of the Orders in Council, and to the proposition which had been made to her. The Amendment was then negatived, and the Report brought up. On the ques tion, That it be now read, clergymen throughout England, to be read in their respective churches, filled with the grossest falsehoods, relative to Buonaparté; and he inferred that this spirit had not subsided, as one of the paragraphs in the Speech from the throne, at the conclusion of the last session, seemed to speak language somewhat similar. Mr. Ponsonby rose, and explained his reasons for pursuing the line he had done on Mr. Whitbread went over the arguments the former evening. If he had been in the which he had before advanced in support House in 1793, he would have voted for of his Address; and in reference to his asMr. Fox's motion to send an ambassador sertion that a spirit existed in this country, to Paris, to prevent the breaking out of personally hostile to the French emperor, the war; and for this reason, because the he instanced a pamphlet which was pubwhole question was, whether the govern-lished by authority, during lord Sidmouth's ment of France, as then constituted, was administration, and sent to the different fit to be treated with; and as he was of opinion, that one independent state should not interfere with the government of another, he, of course, conceived that a treaty might be concluded with the provisional council which then ruled in France; and he would have confined himself to this opinion, that it was more easy to treat for the prevention of war than for peace. His hon. friend had stated, that there were persons who entertained an opinion, that no peace could be made with the present emperor of France. Now, if his hon. friend could shew him that such an idea was cherished by any of his Majesty's ministers, he pledged himself to vote with him for an Address to-morrow; because he thought the French emperor might be treated with as well as the head of any other government. His hon. friend had said, that the Address only proposed to the Prince Regent to examine whether a peace could be made on proper terms. This certainly was a mitigated character of the measure; but still it implied one of these two things-either that the ministers were not willing to enter into a nego Mr. Canning defended the passage in the Speech of the Lords Commissioners alluded to by the hon. gentleman; and then went over nearly the same grounds, on the subject of peace with France, as he had before done. Mr. Bathurst defended the administration of lord Sidmouth, and denied, peremptorily, as far as his recollection permitted him, the authorised publication of any such pamphlet as that mentioned by the hon. gentleman. Mr. Whitbread said, it was shewn to him by the clergyman of a church in Bedfordshire; and the person who wrote it, [Mr. Cobbett] afterwards declared, that it was circulated throughout the country by order of government. The Chancellor of the Exchequer wished to know, if he could see the publication alluded to? Mr. Whitbread said he had a copy of it, and the right hon. gentleman should have it in a few hours. Mr. Canning begged to put a question to ministers, namely, at what time it was their intention to bring forward the subject of the renewal of the East India Company's Charter. This was a question of very general importance, and it was peculiarly desirable to those interested, that it should be known, whether it was or was not to be agitated previous to the Christ mas recess. Lord Castlereagh said, it certainly was not the intention of government to bring forward the question alluded to before Christmas. But, being a question of such importance, if government could come to an arrangement with the East India Company during the recess, it was their intention to bring forward the discussion at the earliest possible period after the recess. The Report was then agreed to. HOUSE OF LORDS. Thursday, December 3. PETITION AGAINST THE CATHOLIC CLAIMS FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE.] The Bishop of Bristol requested the indulgence of the House whilst he said a few words relative to what had fallen from a noble earl (Hardwicke) on a former day, relative to the Petition from the University of Cambridge against the Catholic Claims, he (the bishop of Bristol) not having been in the House on the day alluded to. The right reverend prelate proceeded to state, that it was not usual in the University to give more than three days' notice of any measure intended to be brought forward; but in this instance, it being a measure of importance, six days' notice was given, a longer notice than he ever remembered in the University. He stated this to prove that the proceeding was not unfairly carried through, as al leged by the noble earl; the fact being, that the greater number of those who voted in the minority came from London in consequence of the notice that had been given. With respect to the insinuation as to the motives of those who formed the majority, that they were looking either to preferment or translation, he must leave it to the noble earl himself to consider, whether a mere difference of opinion called for such a charge. The Earl of Hardwicke trusted, though he was aware it was irregular, that after what had fallen from the right rev. prelate, he should be permitted to trouble their lordships with a few words. He regretted that the learned prelate was not in the House, when the Petition from Cambridge against the Roman Catholic Claims was prepared by the illustrious person who was chancellor of the University, when he had felt it his duty to offer some observations to their lordships, which he was as ready to repeat in the presence of the right rev. prelate, as in his absence. In the first place, it was impossible for him to avoid stating, that considering the great public importance of the subject of the Petition, sufficient notice had not been given to admit of the attendance of any considerable number of the non-resident members. For all questions of a local nature, on which the resident members were certainly well qualified to decide, the notice described by the right rev. prelate as the usual notice, and which had probably been given upon this occasion, was perfectly sufficient; but whenever a question relating to matters of state policy was brought forward, it would be more Consistent with fairness and candour to give that degree of notice which would admit of the attendance of the non-resident members of the senate, if they should think fit to give their opinions upon the subject; but he could not help saying, that the seldomer political questions were brought before the senate of the University, the better. With respect to what the right rev. prelate had said on the subject of motives, the noble earl observed, that what he had said was entirely of a general nature, and not applied to the conduct of any individual. The usage of the place did not admit of questions being discussed, or debated, before they were put to the vote; and, therefore, he could not help feeling that many persons might give their votes upon general grounds, without that knowledge and understanding of the question, which must in all cases render the decision more satisfactory to themselves as conscientious individuals, and at the same time give more weight to the opinions of a great public body. The Bishop of Bristol repeated, that the notice given was unusually long. The Marquis of Lansdowne contended that the notice was not sufficient, and observed that he himself, although only a day's journey from London, had not notice |