to know, how it was possible for the most conscientious and scrupulous servant of the public to make a more candid, or a more honest declaration? Perhaps this major Davies had thought that the letters did not go far enough, and the expences might have been hinted at ith a view to entrap the gentleman who was spoken of. That gentleman had himself spoken more ably than he could upon the subject; but it was to be observed, that he had never interposed the weight of his official influence, and so powerful was the influence on the other side, that it was proved by the honourable baronet himself, that a person in an official situation had been sent out of the way, because he was supposed to be friendly, to government. The petition itself was another proof of the very little influence that was made use of by those who were friendly to his majesty's government, and of the very great exertions that were made on the opposite side; it was signed by two persons who, he was informed, were servants to the honourable baronet, by another who was secretary to the militia, where Lord Bolton was lord lieutenant, (and he no doubt was a nobleman who never made any use of his official authority to procure a vote :) another signature was that of a person who was clerk to the collectors of taxes, and who was now soliciting the situation of surveyor from that terrible go vernment which bore down every thing with its authority. It was idle to talk of a committee to inquire, for the facts were clear before the House, and all that remained was, for the House to declare by its vote that night, whether they would pronounce their censure on the conduct which had been so proved, or whether they would dismiss the accusation as one that was unworthy of being entertained by that House. The learned gentleman opposite (Mr. Perceval) had said that there were many other cases where the influence of government had been made use of; but it might fairly be said, ab uno disce omnes, and, as no doubt, the gentlemen on the other side did not direct their organ to bring forward his weakest case first, the House might fairly infer that the others, if any, were not such as would be likely to be productive of very dangerous consequences to the liberties of England. When a motion was made (that of Mr. Biddulph) for inquiry into the extent of salaries and emoluments in various public offices, a motion which was certainly not of a nature that was likely to strengthen or be favourable to any administration, it was, however, thought

to

to be one that might tend to the advantage of the public, and accordingly it was most cheerfully acceded to, and most zealously, as well as most ably supported by his noble friend (Lord H. Petty). But neither his majesty's ministers nor the House, he trusted, would suffer themselves to be led away by any groundless accusations that might be brought before them.

Sir H. Mildmay denied that any of his servants were subscribers to the petition.

Mr. Perceval explained.

Mr. Rose said, that he had come down to the House in the determination not to say a word upon the question; but after the personal attacks that were made upon his conduct, it was impossible for him to remain altogether silent. As to the letter read by the noble lord, and addressed by him to a person who had offered his services in favour of the person he would recommend, there was nothing in it similar to the case now before the House; nor was the disclosure of that letter a proof of much gratitude on the part of the gentleman in behalf of whom it had been written. Had he deserved the blame that was imputed to him, not only should he have deserved the censure of that House, but also the forfeiture of his employment. As to the libel against him, alluded to by the noble lord, it was not matter grave enough to be brought before that House: but it had got into a newspaper, and he had laid his hand upon the printer, and called upon him to make good his charge. He did not institute a criminal prosecution against the man: such was not his object; for his only wish was to clear his own character. Under that impression, he brought his civil action, and obtained a verdict and damages. This libel has lately been re-published, and there was room to believe, under the direction of a distant relation of the noble lord opposite to him (Lord Temple). He could see no ground of charge against him in it now; for if there was, he had given a fair opportunity to prove it, and the proof had failed. His motives for countenancing the present petition were very different from those imputed to him; it was not to support bis popularity, or to wound the feelings of the gentleman (Mr. Herbert) against whom it seemned directed; no man could entertain more sincere regard for that honourable gentleman than he did. But there were several facts that called for censur, and which might be proved if the House acceded to the pre

sent

sent motion. He should now chiefly refer to the conduct of an honourable gentleman (Mr. Calcraft) in the town which he had the honour to represent, to which that honourable gentleman came and used entreaties and threats, to influence the election of the municipal officers of that town; when afterwards Parliament was dissolved, letters were brought down by the same gentleman, under the hand and seal of the secretary of the treasury, to instigate the custom-house officers, who are disabled by law from taking any part in such matters, to exert themselves in support of the friends of government. In another instance, a military man had received the same instructions; and the burgesses were hunted from one end of the town to the other, when, after all, not more than one vote could possibly be obtained. He certainly, at more than one public meeting, had inveighed against such practices of government; and he was now ready.to declare, that he never knew of any such practised by any administration in this country. For his part, he never had recourse to such means, either to support himself or his near relation in another town. There were about 7000 votes in Southampton; and out of that number he did not think that his son got more than two from the recollection of any kindness conferred upon the freemen by him or his connexion. Indeed, some that had promised him their votes, were deterred from keeping their promise; for they were afraid that if they did, they might expect to lose their situations. Such was the system of terror acted on by ruinisters, of which he should adduce a variety of proofs, if the committee moved for, was ap pointed.

Mr. Calcraft repelled the charge of ingratitude and ty ranny which the right honourable gentleman had advanced against him. He declared that he never heard that the letter referred to was in the hands of any person, until about two months since, when he was informed by the secretary of the treasury that he had got such a letter, with his answer to it, which he had quite forgot to have ever written. That he had ever used any threat to the magistrates of Christ. church he most solemnly denied, and therefore the right honourable gentleman ought not to rely on their informa tion. Indeed, if such informers were to be trusted, they told some strange stories of the right honourable gentleman himself. For the only time he saw those magistrates was at the house of a respectable inhabitant of Christchurch,

who

who was present at the conversation; and they stated that the right honourable gentleman told them that he was not in opposition to government, that he never thwarted the measures of ministers, but that on the contrary, he was on the most intimate footing with many of the principal members of the government, and that he was assisting the chancellor of the exchequer (a laugh.) Would the right honourable gentleman then advise that evidence should be given to such authority? But with reference to the question before the House, the right honourable gentleman ought to have had the candour to state that these very magistrates voted for him, and yet they were never disturbed in the offices which they held under government, and yet that government was, according to the right hon. gentleman's sentiments, capable of abusing his power for the purposes of revenge and undue influence.

The Solicitor General thought it very singular that the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Rose) should, as he stated, have formed a resolution not to speak in the course of the debate, considering the important facts which he had alleged, and the written evidence which he had brought with him to support these facts. But really the right honourable gentleman could not himself rely on the truth of such allegations, or he would not have neglected, with all the solicitude with which he professes and feels to preserve the freedom of election, to bring them forward in the first instance for they were surely much stronger than the case, to which the motion referred. But in point of fact it was not to be supposed that the hon. gentleman would have declined to put these strong cases in the front line of his attack on ministers, if he thought they could have been maintained, much less that he should have determined not to state them at all, if he had not been irritated by something which fell from his noble friend below him (Lord Howick). Therefore this important communication from the right honourable gentleman was not owing to an anxiety for public justice, or the maintenance of a free election, but to personal resentment.

After a few words from Lord Howick, Mr. Rose, Mr. Ashton Smith, and Mr. Herbert, the Honse divided,

HOUSE OF LORDS.

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 16.

Lord Hawkesbury moved for an address to his majesty to lay before the House certain papers, consisting of returns of the military force of the country, number of men enlisted, desertions, &c. Ordered.

A short conversation took place between the Earl of Westmoreland and Lord Grenville, respecting a motion made by the former for the printing of certain papers on the table, consisting of correspondence between his majesty's secretaries of state and the governors of the West India islands. Lord Grenville objected to the motion, on the grounds of expence, and the bill to which the papers applied being out of the House. The Earl of Westmoreland declined to press his motion, and the conversation dropped.

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN SCOTLAND.

Lord Grenville said, he had the honour to present to their lordships the bill of which he had some time since given notice, for the better regulation of the courts of justice in Scotland. On entering into the discussion of this subject, he could not begin better than by obviating a misrepresentation which had been industriously circulated, and which had stated his object to be, to assimilate the law of Scotland to that of this country. He had no such view, nor could he conceive any theory more erroneous; any project more wild and pregnant with danger; than that of endeavouring to impose the laws of one country upon another, without considering the difference of habits and manners. It was no part of his intention, nor had he ever so stated it, to propose any alteration in the laws of Scotland; his object was that that law should be better administered. That some measure of this nature was absolutely necessary must be obvious to their lordships. Their table was now loaded with appeals, the greater part of which were from the court of session in Scotland, and which i creased so much faster than it was possible for their lordships to decide upon them, appropriating for that purpose all the time which they could devote consistently with the other duties which they had to perform,

that