American ships between port and port, in the countries of Europe under the domination of France, extended it to all the seas of the world, and thus forced America to the em bargo. The American government in the late negotia tion, as was obvious from the papers on the table, evinced a friendly disposition towards this country, and a contrary one towards France. She offered to take off her embargo in respect to this country, if we would rescind towards her our orders in council. And if we were disposed to this proposition, and only hesitated from a doubt of her sincerity, why was not some endeavonr made in the course of negotiation, to secure the exclusion of American ships from French ports, and obtain the consent of the American government for durselves to secure that point, by making, prize of all vessels of that nation, found approaching the ports of the enemy. It was the obvious policy of this country to excite hostility between France and America, and this would be the almost inevitable consequence of a cessation of the embargo in favour of England, while it was continued towards France. He coincided fully in the sentiments of Mr. Grattan, and voted for the address.

Mr. G. Rose, jun. entered into some explanation on the business of his diplomatic mission to America, and said, that notwithstanding the sole object of his embassy was to make satisfaction in the affair of the Chesapeake, be found it impracticable to conclude the business without fending to protracted discussions, the nature of which were incompatible with the honour of this country. And even the very vessel on board of which he went, was not suffered to remain in an American port, but under the direction of the commissioner of customs, and in such station as he should point out. This was so totally incompatible with the nature of the situation he held, as to induce his departure.

Mr. Whitbread made a very short reply to a few of the points urged against his motion.

The House now became urgent for the question; and a division took place:

Ayes for the address
Noes

. 83

145

Majority against it

62

Adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

TUESDAY, MARCH 7.

The corn distillation, spirit, intercourse, prohibition, and Irish bank-note bills were read a third time, and passed. Adjourned.

The Secretary at War moved the order of the day for the consideration of the report of the mutiny bill; but as. the new clauses which he proposed to introduce had been printed, and were in the hands of gentlemen, on a recom mendation from the chair, the bill was recommitted for the purpose of making these clauses part of it.

The house having resolved into the committee, Mr. Wharton in the chair.

The Secretary at War called the attention of the com mittee to the object of the first clause, which he proposed to introduce into the bill. It was to enable the commissioners of excise to grant licences to persons holding canteens in barracks. Such places of accommodation were necessary for the refreshment of the soldiers, and with a view to discipline it was unquestionably better that they should be so situated as to be under the eye of their officers. This clanse had been rendered necessary by the inconvenience which had been felt, when vacancies occurred, or new barracks were built, the magistrates by whom these licences had been hitherto granted, not having the power to grant them but once in a year.

The same

inconvenience was felt when persons who had canteens were dismissed. It became therefore desirable that the power of granting licences should be lodged somewhere independent of the usual mode of granting them. It was difficult to provide against other than the military resorting to such places; but every care should be taken to confine them to the accommodation of the troops, and he trusted that no inconvenience would be felt in the country from the operation of this clause.

On the motion that the clause be made part of the bill,

a short conversation took place, in which Sir Edward Knatchbull suggested the propriety of giving the power of granting the licences at any time within the year, when vacancies could occur, to the magistrates, rather than to the commissioners of excise; and Mr. Hurst recom mended that the power of granting such licences, when Vacancies occurred, should be restricted to licences for military purposes, and that the present mode of granting licences for civil purposes should be preserved to the civil magistrates; upon which the Secretary at War agreed to postpone the consideration of the clause till to-morrow, when he should be happy to avail himself of the sugges tions of the honourable members.

The various amendments in the body of the bill, and the new clauses were then gone through, the chief of which were the following: an amendment to extend the exemption from billeting soldiers on a march, to persons holding canteens under the commissioners for the affairs of bar racks; an amendment for exempting carts with four horses, or waggons, having narrow wheels, from the penalties of the road acts, if they should, by accident, bear a load above the statute weight; an amendment, making persons refusing to billet officers or soldiers in Ireland, liable to the penalties in force in Ireland, at the time of the union; an amendment to facilitate the proof of the indentures of ap prentices, by making the certificate of a magistrate, that the indenture and hand-writing were proved before him, a sufficient proof of an indenture; and a clause to authorise courts martial to inflict greater penalties than" heretofore upon persons in the commissariat who should have fraudently misapplied any of his majesty's stores. This latter clause, the Secretary at War observed, had been rendered necessary by the insufficiency of the present penalty; dismissal from the service, and a fine of 1007. to deter persons employed upon foreign stations from yielding to the great temptation of embezzling public stores. The clause had been originally framed to extend over the empire, but as it was not deemed necessary to give such a power to courts martial in Great Britain or Ireland, an amendment had been made in it, restricting its operation to the foreign settlements.

Sir C. Pole desired to be informed whether any and what proceedings had been taken by the law officers of the crown, pursuant to the recommendations of the 1st,

10th, 12th, and 13th reports of the commissioners of naval. inquiry; and whether any and what sums had been res covered for the public in consequence,

The Chancellor of the Exchequer was unable to state what particular proceedings had been taken by the at torney general, or what progress had been made therein, but could assure the honourable baronet that proceedings. had been instituted.

The Committee was then put off to Friday; and the other orders of the day having been deferred, the House Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 8.

The routine business having been gone through,

Lord Folkstone gave notice, that after the close of the debate upon the report of the Committee of the whole House to which it was referred to consider of the conduct of his royal highness the Duke of York, it was his intention to move, that the said report be taken into conside ration on Monday se'nnight.

Lord Folkstone then moved the order of the day, for calling over the House, to be read; and, on the order being read, that the House be called over to-morrow,

On this question being put,

Mr. Beresford asked, whether it was the intention of the noble lord to keep this call over the House until his motion should be disposed of, or whether it was to be in force

to-morrow.

Lord Folkstone replied, that it was his intention to continue the call of the House, until the very important question then before the House should be finally deter

mined.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer remarked, that when the House had adopted the first call, upon the suggestion of the noble lord, it was with a view to secure as effectual an attendance of members as possible, on the very important discussion which was then in contemplation. Upon the same principle, he was persuaded that the House would not do its duty, unless it agreed to the motion of the noble lord. The object of the noble lord most certainly was to procure a full and effectual attendance, upon the most important business that could

311. Occupy the attention of parliament. The effect of the call would not be to bring all the members of that House within its operation, because unquestionably those whose duties elsewhere rendered their attendance in that House impracticable, or inconvenient to the public service, could not be expected to yield obedience to it. But if the House should not adopt the motion of the noble lord, the effect of its rejection would be, that the House would lose the benefit of that effectual attendance, which was so desira ble, and so necessary, upon questions of such serious moment. He therefore hoped, though gentlemen might have other duties of local or public interest to perform, that yet the House would continue to enforce a full atten dance of its members, until the important business then pending should be finally closed. It would be for the House, during the progress of this business, upon any case being made out, to exercise its own judgment in dispensing with the attendance of any individual member; but in concurring in the motion of the noble lord, he wished it to be understood, that the House was acting upon the principle of carrying its own views into effect, and not influenced by any consideration of the judicial decisions of any persons out of that House, as to what might be the consequences of its proceedings. It was not to be endured that any idea should go forth, as if that House, in the regulation of its conduct, or the choice of its mode of proceeding, was to be governed by any threats from without, as to what might be the conse quence of any course it should think proper to adopt. (Hear, hear!)-It was the sole judge of its own proceedings, and not to be swayed nor intimidated from the free exercise of its constitutional functions by the judicial assertions of any persons whatever.~(Hear, hear!)~ He would not say more upon that subject on this occa sion, because if he did, he must, perhaps, be led to the adoption of some more practical notice of that to which he was alluding." (Hear, hear!) But if the House was placed in the situation of representatives of the people, he must add, that it would but ill discharge the obligation due to its constituents, if it did not perform its duty upon every occasion, without minding what might be the judg ment passed in such a manner upon its conduct. Thus much he had thought it necessary to say upon this sub ject, but to come to the particular object of his rising, há