of the honourable gentleman; and individuals ought not to have been feasted and pampered up for the purpose of sacrificing them on the occasion (a laugh). It was very likely that the entertainment, as it was served up at present, was not to the taste of the honourable gentleman; but was it to be argued that when government had invaded the rights and independence of a county, and pleaded customs as a ground for denying redress, the House of Commons should refuse to inquire into the grounds of a petition complaining of the injury, and invade another right of the subject, merely because the form of the petition in question may be disagreeable to those whose crime was its substance? Was the House to call for and compare all rough drafts, and amendments of the several petitions that had been sketched previous to the one finally presented? Was the House, in assuming a right which it did not possess, to lose sight of the due exercise of a duty which was incumbeut upon it? He had heard it was maintained in another place, that the influence of government was a sort of paternal influence, which may as properly be exercised over the people as that of a landlord over the tenant.' He had not heard that sentiment uttered here so generally. But when so important a person as the secretary of the treasury stated any thing bordering upon it, it became the House to guard against it in the outset, particularly when that secretary of the treasury stated that he had come into office critically at that period, and that the whole business of the elections was in his hands. He was glad to find the honourable gentleman had estates in Hampshire; but he could not have estates in every county, or houses in every borough. He must think, upon the whole of the circumstances, that the letter to General Ilewitt was written, not as a letter from one private freeholder to another, but in the character of Mr. Freemantle, secretary to the treasury, having the charge of managing the general election, to the person at the head of the barrack department, claiming the exertion of his extensive influence. But it was arguet the House ought to have no jealousy of a petition complaining of this interference, and an honourable gentleman who represented the county of Hants, recommended that the petition should be dismissed, and thrown back with disgrace upon the heads of those who had preferred it. This would hardly be of service to the honourable_genteman in another similar crisis of difficulty,hether he may

or

or may not happen to have a friend in the situation of secretary to the treasury, and having a freehold in Hamp shire. He had trusted that it would not have been necessary for him to speak upon this question; and though he had a high respect for some of the petitioners, he would have been silent, had not the arguments offered on the opposite side called upon him for these observations. He had hoped that such a petition, moved and seconded by such persons, would have met universal concurrence. He was ready to allow, that if the petitioners could not prove their allegations, the strength of the language in which they expressed their complaints ought to subject them to But that the strength of the language should be made a ground for rejecting the petition, when those who signed it professed themselves ready to prove their allegations, was what appeared to him most extraor dinary and most unjustifiable, and therefore he would give one vote at least to preserve the House from the censure that must fall upon it, if the petition should be dismissed with- . out proper consideration.

some censure.

Mr. Adam thought it unfair, in an experienced debater, to take advantage of an inadvertant expression of an hon ourable gentleman unused to public speaking. The bonourable gentleman had besides corrected the expression of the propriety of government interfering in elections in a corporate capacity, almost as soon as he had used it. The holder of the office of secretary of the treasury was one of those officers who were distinguished by law or by resoJutions of the House from taking part in elections. He was,therefore, at full liberty to vote and canvass like any other individual. The present case was not the case of the county of Hants in particular. It was a general case to be decided on general principles. The secretary of the treasury was in no way disqualified from interfering; in the case of 1779, the Duke of Chandos was disqualified by law as a peer of Parliament, and as a lord lieutenant. Mr. Freemantle had written in favour of Mr. Herbert. He had written as a freeholder, not as a secretary of the treasury, to General Hewitt, not as a barrack master general, but as a freeholder. The honourable gentleman did, not deny to a member of government the right of canvassing tenants, or other persons connected with him. it was only the applications of threats or bribes that could be called undue influence. No charge of that kind was made.

It was only a violation of the law of Parliament and of the. land, that could constitute a fit subject for the investiga tion of the commitee of privileges. In the present case there was no new part to be brought forward. Would it be consistent with the dignity of the House to go into a committee of privileges to inquire into what was known not to be in existence? The committee of privileges was one of the most ancient and venerable forms of the House, and ought not to be resorted to on light grounds. The facts were acknowledged, and the construction clear in tlie present case. He would, therefore, vote against going into the committee, and particularly because he was of opinion that even if a slight error was substantiated, the House ought to overlook it.

'Lord Folkstone allowed that the members of government had a right to interfere in elections as private individuals; but he could consider the letter from the secretary of the treasury to the barrack-master-general, in this case only as an official letter. It was understood as such by those whose conduct it was to influence. He did expect that the gentlemen on the other side would have assented to the motion, in consideration of their own honour, of the honour of the county of Hants, and of the House of Commons. He understood that much further grounds of crimination were to be brought forward; and particularly a letter from one of the other public boards, signed by the secre tary. On this ground he wished to go into the com, mittee,

"Mr. Johnstone agreed that this was a general question. It was whether the House would sanction a secretary of the treasury in sending a letter from the treasury, perhaps signed with the seal of the treasury and carried by a mes senger of the treasury, to ask the influence of a great public department on a general election. Every one who understands this to be a measure of mere private canvass between freeholder and freeholder would vote against going into a committee. But it appeared to him to be official, and therefore he voted for inquiry. The barrack-master-ge neral, the secretary of the barrack board, and major Da, vies, all understood the letter to be official. He denied that this letter was a single instance of the interference of government in elections. He himself had seen many simiJar letters, particularly one written by the same secretary of the treasury to an elector in Yorkshire, whose name he

did not know, to influence his vote. He adverted to the abstinence from all interference in the general election in the administration of Lord Sidmouth. He called upon. those who wish to prevent the undue influence of government from extending to every county, city, and borough in the county, to vote for going into the committee.

Mr. Bathurst saw no reason to go into a committee of privileges, when there were no facts touching privilege to be authenticated. The facts in this case were clear, and the construction was ob ious. If any gentleman thought there was foundation for a motion of censure, he may bring it forward. The House of commons would hardly go into a committee of privileges to fish out grievances now unknown. The fact stated in the petition was all the House could attend to. It was extremely improper to introduce the name of the comptroller of the navy, or of any. other person, without a, specific foundation. Mr. Free-. mantle had declared that he had written the letter merely in his individual capacity, and there was no reason to presume the contrary. The petition stated, that the petitioners believed Mr. Freemantle had no property in the County of Hants, but it now appeared he had; and thus far the petition proceeded on false grounds. It was an unfair exaggeration to state that it had been argued by his honourable friend (Mr. Tierney), that because the county of Hants had been of en violated, it was not entitled to redress. His honourable friend, while remarking upon the extraordinary zeal shewn on this occasion by some honourable gentlemen on the other side,, had contended that there was no violation in the present case. The honourable gentleman (Mr. Camming) had declared, he did not mean to impute any guilt, but merely inferred ground for suspicion. Sonie persons were always disposed to put the worst construction. lie hoped the House would not do so. He thought it no disgrace to the petition not to go into a committee upon it. No two cases could be more distinct than the present, and that of the Duke of Chandos, who was lord lieutenant of the county, and a peer of Parliament. The facts, and the construction in this case were clear, and, therefore, there was nothing for which to go into the committee.

Mr. Perceval began by observing, that he had heard in the course of the debate a general expression of surprise: que set of gentlemen were surprised at the manner in which

this charge had been brought forward: another at the charge itself. A noble lord, who had just sat down (Lord Folkstone) had freely expressed his surprise at the strange reception this petition had met with from his majesty's ministers in that House; and the noble lord was surprised at such a reception, because the noble lord thought such a line of conduct inconsistent with those professions in favour of free and liberal inquiry into all alledged abuses of a public nature, which were ever in the mouths of the men comprising the present government of the country. He, for his part, could not be brought to think that the reason assigned was at all a satisfactory one, for to be told that the present administration were in every instance acting in direct inconsistency with their professions when out of power, would have produced in his mind sensations very opposite to those of surprise. No; of all other emotions, surprise was that from which he was at that moment most free. What had been the conduct of ministers upon that night he had long since learned to anticipate from what had been their conduct upon all occasions that involved the sincerity of their former professions in the bold and unblushing contradiction of their practice. He therefore was prepared to receive that fresh instance of their good faith and consistency, as completely of a picce with alltheir other proceedings; for liowever they may, night after night, uniformly pursue that conduct which when out of office they as uniformly decried, they have been, since they came into office, at least consistent in their systematic perseverance in contradicting, both in their language and their measures, all the mighty professions and high-flying theories which in so great a measure character- · ized that deceased body of reformers. What, for instance, had been the language upon the former night when that petition was presented? No less than mutual congratulation was given and exchanged by the gentlemen upon the opposite side; they were rejoiced, forsooth!that the period of triumph and inquiry had at length arrived; that investigation the most strict would end in' acquittal the most honourable; and that the poison of ca lumny which had been so generally and insidiously circulated would be checked in its dissemination, and that its propagators would be justly exposed to the vengeance dac from injured innocence and honour, to the latent promoters of malevolent aspersions, and wanton accusations.

Such