Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

view, I am convinced it was for the welfare, for the safety of the whole empire. But, my Lords, with all these advantages, with all these recommendations, if I had the honor of advising his Majesty, I never would have consented to his accepting the augmentation, with that absurd, dishonorable condition which the ministry have submitted to annex to it. My Lords, I revere the just prerogative of the Crown, and would contend for it as warmly as for the rights of the people. They are linked together, and naturally support each other. I would not touch a feather of the prerogative. The expression, perhaps, is too light; but, since I have made use of it, let me add, that the entire command and power of directing the local disposition of the army is to the royal prerogative, as the master feather in the eagle's wing; and, if I were permitted to carry the allusion a little farther, I would say, they have disarmed the imperial bird, the "Ministrum Fulminis Alitem." The army is the thunder of the Crown. The ministry have tied up the hand which should direct the bolt.

116

My Lords, I remember that Minorca was lost for want of four battalions. They could not be spared from hence, and there was a delicacy about taking them from Ireland. I was one of those who promoted an inquiry into that matter in the other House; and I was convinced we had not regular troops sufficient for the necessary service of the nation. Since the moment the plan of augmentation was first talked of, I have constantly and warmly supported it among my friends. I have recommended it to several members of the Irish House of Commons, and exhorted them to support it with their utmost interest in Parliament. I did not foresee, nor could I conceive it possible, the ministry would accept of it, with a condition that makes the plan itself ineffectual, and, as far as it operates, defeats every useful purpose of maintaining a standing military force. His Majesty is now so confined by his promise, that he must leave twelve thou

This refers to an engagement on the part of the King, that a number of effective troops, not less than 12,000 men, should at all times, except in cases of invasion or rebellion in Great Britain, be kept in Ireland for its better defense.

"The winged minister of thunder." This is one of the most beautiful instances in our literature of rising at once from a casual and familiar expression, which seemed below the dignity of the occasion, into a magnificent image, sustained and enforced by a quotation from Horace, which has always been admired for its sublimity and strength.

The image of a feather here applied to the King may have suggested to Junius (who was obviously an attentive hearer of Lord Chatham) a similar application of it to the same personage a few months after, in what has generally been considered the finest of his images. "The King's honor is that of his people. Their real honor and interest are the same. ****The feather that adorns the royal bird supports its flight. Strip him of his plumage, and you fix him to the earth." 7 In January, 1756.

sand men locked up in Ireland, let the situation of his affairs abroad, or the approach of danger to this country, be ever so alarming, unless there be an actual rebellion or invasion in Great Britain. Even in the two cases excepted by the King's promise, the mischief must have already begun to operate, must have already taken effect, before his Majesty can be authorized to send for the assistance of his Irish army. He has not left himself the power of taking any preventive measures, let his intelligence be ever so certain, his apprehensions of invasion or rebellion be ever so well founded. Unless the traitor be actually in arms, unless the enemy be in the heart of your country, he can not move a single man from Ireland.

I feel myself compelled, my Lords, to return to that subject which occupies and interests me most. I mean the internal disorder of the Constitution, and the remedy it demands. But first I would observe, there is one point upon which I think the noble Duke has not explained himself. I do not mean to catch at words, but, if possible, to possess the sense of what I hear. I would treat every man with candor, and should expect the same candor in return. For the noble Duke, in particular, I have every personal respect and regard. I never desire to understand him but as he wishes to be understood. His Grace, I think, has laid much stress upon the diligence of the several public offices, and the assistance given them by the administration in preparing a state of the expenses of his Majesty's civil government, for the information of Parliament and for the satisfaction of the public. He has given us a number of plausible reasons for their not having yet been able to finish the account; but, as far as I am able to recollect, he has not yet given us the smallest reason to hope that it ever will be finished, or that it ever will be laid before Parliament.

My Lords, I am not unpracticed in business; and if, with all that apparent diligence, and all that assistance which the noble Duke speaks of, the accounts in question have not yet been made up, I am convinced there must be a defect in some of the public offices, which ought to be strictly inquired into, and severely punished. But, my Lords, the waste of the public money is not, of itself, so important as the pernicious purpose to which we have reason to suspect that there has been an influx of wealth into this counmoney has been applied. For some years past, try, which has been attended with many fatal consequences, because it has not been the regular, natural produce of labor and industry. riches of Asia have been poured in upon us, and have brought with them not only Asiatic luxury, but, I fear, Asiatic principles of government. Without connections, without any natural interest in the soil, the importers of foreign gold have forced their way into Parliament by such a tor

The

8 Much of the wealth which was brought from India about this time, was used for the purchase of seats in Parliament by men who went out mere ad

venturers.

rent of private corruption, as no private heredit- | pendence. The infusion of health which I now ary fortune could resist. My Lords, not saying allude to would be to permit every county to but what is within the knowledge of us all, the elect one member more, in addition to their prescorruption of the people is the great original ent representation. The knights of the shires cause of the discontents of the people themselves, approach nearest to the constitutional represenof the enterprise of the Crown, and the notorious tation of the county, because they represent the decay of the internal vigor of the Constitution. soil. It is not in the little dependent boroughs, For this great evil some immediate remedy must it is in the great cities and counties that the be provided; and I confess, my Lords, I did hope strength and vigor of the Constitution resides; that his Majesty's servants would not have suf- and by them alone, if an unhappy question should fered so many years of peace to relapse without ever arise, will the Constitution be honestly and paying some attention to an object which ought firmly defended. It would increase that strength, to engage and interest us all. I flattered my- because I think it is the only security we have self I should see some barriers thrown up in against the profligacy of the times, the corrupdefense of the Constitution; some impediment tion of the people, and the ambition of the formed to stop the rapid progress of corruption. Crown.9 I doubt not we all agree that something must be done. I shall offer my thoughts, such as they are, to the consideration of the House; and I wish that every noble Lord that hears me would be as ready as I am to contribute his opinion to this important service. I will not call my own sentiments crude and undigested. It would be unfit for me to offer any thing to your Lordships which I had not well considered; and this subject, I own, has not long occupied my thoughts. I will now give them to your Lordships without

reserve.

Whoever understands the theory of the English Constitution, and will compare it with the fact, must see at once how widely they differ. We must reconcile them to each other, if we wish to save the liberties of this country; we must reduce our political practice, as nearly as possible, to our principles. The Constitution intended that there should be a permanent relation between the constituent and representative body of the people. Will any man affirm that, as the House of Commons is now formed, that relation is in any degree preserved? My Lords, it is not preserved; it is destroyed. Let us be cautious, however, how we have recourse to violent expedients.

The boroughs of this country have properly enough been called "the rotten parts" of the Constitution. I have lived in Cornwall, and, without entering into any invidious particularity, have seen enough to justify the appellation. But in my judgment, my Lords, these boroughs, corrupt as they are, must be considered as the natural infirmity of the Constitution. Like the infirmities of the body, we must bear them with patience, and submit to carry them about with us. The limb is mortified, but the amputation might be death.

[ocr errors]

I think I have weighed every possible objection that can be raised against a plan of this nature; and I confess I see but one which, to me, carries any appearance of solidity. It may be said, perhaps, that when the act passed for uniting the two kingdoms, the number of persons who were to represent the whole nation in Parliament was proportioned and fixed on forever. That this limitation is a fundamental article, and can not be altered without hazarding a dissolution of the Union.

My Lords, no man who hears me can have a greater reverence for that wise and important act than I have. I revere the memory of that great prince [King William III.] who first formed the plan, and of those illustrious patriots who carried it into execution. As a contract, every article of it should be inviolable; as the common basis of the strength and happiness of two nations, every article of it should be sacred. I hope I can not be suspected of conceiving a thought so detestable as to propose an advantage to one of the contracting parties at the expense of the other. No, my Lords, I mean that the benefit should be universal, and the consent to receive it unanimous. Nothing less than a most urgent and important occasion should persuade me to vary even from the letter of the act; but there is no occasion, however urgent, however important, that should ever induce me to depart from the spirit of it. Let that spirit be religiously preserved. Let us follow the principle upon which the representation of the two countries was proportioned at the Union; and when we increase the number of representatives for the English counties, let the shires of Scotland be allowed an equal privilege. On these terms, and while the proportion limited by the Union is preserved by the two nations, I apprehend that no man who is a friend to either will

Let us try, my Lords, whether some gentler remedies may not be discovered. Since we can not cure the disorder, let us endeavor to infuse This is the first distinct proposal that was ever such a portion of new health into the Constitu- made for a reform of Parliament. It left the bortion as may enable it to support its most invet-ough system as it was, in all its rottenness, and erate diseases.

The representation of the counties is, I think, still preserved pure and uncorrupted. That of the greatest cities is upon a footing equally respectable; and there are many of the larger trading towns which still preserve their inde

aimed to "infuse a portion of new health into the

Constitution," sufficient to counteract the evil, by increasing the representation from the counties. The plan was never taken up by later reformers The rotten part was amputated in 1832, as Lord Chatham himself predicted it would be before the expi ration of a century.

object to an alteration so necessary for the security of both. I do not speak of the authority of the Legislature to carry such a measure into effect, because I imagine no man will dispute it. But I would not wish the Legislature to interpose by an exertion of its power alone, without the cheerful concurrence of all parties. My object is the happiness and security of the two nations, and I would not wish to obtain it without their mutual consent.

My Lords, besides my warm approbation of the motion made by the noble Lord, I have a natural and personal pleasure in rising up to second it. I consider my seconding his Lordship's motion (and I would wish it to be considered by others) as a public demonstration of that cordial union which I am happy to affirm subsists between us, of my attachment to those principles which he has so well defended, and of my respect for his person. There has been a time, my Lords, when those who wished well to neither of us, who wished to see us separated forever, found a sufficient gratification for their malignity against us both. But that time is happily at an end. The friends of this country will, I doubt not, hear with p'asure that the noble Lord and his friends are now united with me and mine upon a principle which, I trust, will make our union indissoluble. It is not to possess, or divide the emoluments of government, but, if possible, to save the state. Upon

[blocks in formation]

I hope an early day will be agreed to for considering the state of the nation. My infirmities must fall heavily upon me, indeed, if I do not attend to my duty that day. When I consider my age and unhappy state of health, I feel how little I am personally interested in the event of any political question. But I look forward to others, and am determined, as far as my poor ability extends, to convey to them who come after me the blessings which I can not hope to enjoy myself.

It was impossible to resist the motion, and therefore the Duke of Grafton yielded to it with the best grace possible, naming two days from that time, January 24th, as the day for the enquiry. He afterward deferred it until February 2d; but, finding it impossible to resist the pressure, he resigned on the 28th of January, 1770. Lord North took his place. The administration now became more decidedly Tory than before. Lord North continued at the head of the government for about twelve years.

SPEECH

OF LORD CHATHAM ON A MOTION CALLING FOR PAPERS IN RELATION TO THE SEIZURE OF THE FALKLAND ISLANDS BY SPAIN, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS, NOVEMBER 2, 1770.

INTRODUCTION.

THE Falkland Islands, lying about three hundred miles east of the Straits of Magellan, were discovered by the English in the days of Queen Elizabeth, but so dreary and deterring was their appearance, that no steps were taken for their settlement during the next two hundred years. At length, in 1765, they were occupied in form by the British government, who soon after erected a small block-house, named Fort Egmont, on one of the islands, and there stationed a few troops. This gave much offense to the court of Spain, which claimed all the Magellanic regions; and, after sundry protests, Buccarelli, the governor of Buenos Ayres, sent an expedition which drove the English from the islands in the early part of 1770. It is a remarkable fact, as already mentioned, that Lord Chatham predicted this event at the close of the preceding Parliament, during the very month in which the Spanish fleet arrived at the Falkland Islands. "I do now pledge myself," said he, "to this honorable House for the truth of what I am going to assert, that, at this very hour that we are sitting together, a blow of hostility has been struck against us by our old inveterate enemies in some quarter of the world."

When the intelligence of this seizure reached England, the whole nation was fired at the indignity of fered to the British flag, and in every quarter the utmost eagerness was manifested to vindicate the national honor. Lord Chatham, who had always cherished a strong antipathy and contempt for the Spaniards, shared largely in these feelings. Accordingly, when the Duke of Richmond moved for papers on this subject, he made the following speech, in which he first considers the outrage committed by Spain, and then expatiates on the want of spirit exhibited by the ministry, their neglect of naval and military preparations, the depressed condition of the country, and some of the causes which had led to this resuit.

SPEECH, &c.'

MY LORDS,-I rise to give my hearty assent 10 Divide and rule. This speech is understood to have been reported by Sir Philip Francis.

to the motion made by the noble Duke. By his Grace's favor I have been permitted to see it, before it was offered to the House. I have fully considered the necessity of obtaining from the

King's servants a communication of the papers described in the motion, and I am persuaded that the alarming state of facts, as well as the strength of reasoning with which the noble Duke has urged and enforced that necessity, must have been powerfully felt by your Lordships. What I mean to say upon this occasion may seem, perhaps, to extend beyond the limits of the motion before us. But I flatter myself, my Lords, that if I am honored with your attention, it will appear that the meaning and object of this question are naturally connected with considerations of the most extensive national importance. For entering into such considerations, no season is improper, no occasion should be neglected. Something must be done, my Lords, and immediately, to save an injured, insulted, undone country; if not to save the state, my Lords, at least to mark out and drag to public justice those servants of the Crown, by whose ignorance, neglect, or treachery this once great, flourishing people are reduced to a condition as deplorable at home as it is despicable abroad. Examples are wanted, my Lords, and should be given to the world, for the instruction of future times, even though they be useless to ourselves. I do not mean, my Lords, nor is it intended by the motion, to impede or embarrass a negotiation which we have been told is now in a prosperous train, and promises a happy conclusion.

[Lord Weymouth.—I beg pardon for interrupting the noble Lord; but I think it necessary to remark to your Lordships that I have not said a single word tending to convey to your Lordships any information or opinion with regard to the state or progress of the negotiation. I did, with the utmost caution, avoid giving to your Lordships the least intimation upon that matter.] I perfectly agree with the noble Lord. I did not mean to refer to any thing said by his Lordship. He expressed himself, as he always does, with moderation and reserve, and with the greatest propriety. It was another noble Lord, very high in office, who told us he understood that the negotiation was in a favorable train.

[Earl of Hillsborough. I did not make use of the word train. I know the meaning of the word too well. In the language from which it was derived, it signifies protraction and delay, which I could never mean to apply to the present negotiation.]

This is the second time that I have been interrupted. I submit to your Lordships whether this be fair and candid treatment. I am sure it is contrary to the orders of the House, and a gross violation of decency and politeness. I listen to every noble Lord in this House with attention and respect. The noble Lord's design in interrupting me is as mean and unworthy as the manner in which he has done it is irregular and disorderly. He flatters himself that by breaking the thread of my discourse, he shall confuse me in my argument. But, my Lords, I will not submit to this treatment. I will not be interrupted. When I have concluded, let him answer me, if he can. As to the word which he

has denied, I still affirm that it was the word he made use of; but if he had used any other, I am sure every noble Lord will agree with me, that his meaning was exactly what I have expressed it. Whether he said course or train is indiffer

ent.

He told your Lordships that the negotiation was in a way that promised a happy and honorable conclusion. His distinctions are mean, frivolous, and puerile. My Lords, I do not understand the exalted tone assumed by that noble Lord. In the distress and weakness of this country, my Lords, and conscious as the ministry ought to be how much they have contributed to that distress and weakness, I think a tone of modesty, of submission, of humility, would become them better; "quædam causæ modestiam desiderant." Before this country they stand as the greatest criminals. Such I shall prove them to be; for I do not doubt of proving, to your Lordships' satisfaction, that since they have been intrusted with the King's affairs, they have done every thing that they ought not to have done, and hardly any thing that they ought to have done.

The noble Lord talks of Spanish punctilios in the lofty style and idiom of a Spaniard. We are to be wonderfully tender of the Spanish point of honor, as if they had been the complainants, as if they had received the injury. I think he would have done better to have told us what care had been taken of the English honor. My Lords, I am well acquainted with the character of that nation-at least as far as it is represented by their court and ministry, and should think this country dishonored by a comparison of the English good faith with the punctilios of a Spaniard. My Lords, the English are a candid, an ingenuous people. The Spaniards are as mean and crafty as they are proud and insolent. The integrity of the English merchant, the generous spirit of our naval and military officers, would be degraded by a comparison with their merchants or officers. With their ministers I have often been obliged to negotiate, and never met with an instance of candor or dignity in their proceedings; nothing but low cunning, trick, and artifice. After a long experience of their want of candor and good faith, I found myself compelled to talk to them in a peremptory, decisive language. On this principle I submitted my advice to a trembling council for an immediate declaration of a war with Spain.3 Your Lordships well know what were the consequences of not following that advice. Since, however, for reasons unknown to me, it has been thought advisable to negotiate with the court of Spain, I should have conceived that the great and single object of such a negotiation would have been, to obtain complete satisfaction for the injury done to the crown and people of England. But, if I understand the noble Lord, the only object of the present negotiation is to find a salvo for the punctilious honor of the Spaniards. The absurdity of such an idea is of it

2 Some causes call for modesty. In 1761. See p. 63.

self insupportable. But, my Lords, I object to our negotiating at all, in our present circumstances. We are not in that situation in which a great and powerful nation is permitted to negotiate. A foreign power has forcibly robbed his Majesty of a part of his dominions. Is the island restored? Are you replaced in statu quo? If that had been done, it might then, perhaps, have been justifiable to treat with the aggressor upon the satisfaction he ought to make for the insult offered to the Crown of England. But will you descend so low? Will you so shamefully betray the King's honor, as to make it matter of negotiation whether his Majesty's possessions shall be restored to him or not?

|

country ever produced (it is hardly necessary to mention the name of Sir Walter Raleigh), sacrificed by the meanest prince that ever sat upon the throne, to the vindictive jealousy of that haughty court. James the First was base enough, at the instance of Gondomar, to suffer a sentence against Sir Walter Raleigh, for another supposed offense, to be carried into execution almost twelve years after it had been passed. This was the pretense. His real crime was, that he had mortally offended the Spaniards, while he acted by the King's express orders, and under his commission.

My Lords, the pretended disavowal by the court of Spain is as ridiculous as it is false. If your Lordships want any other proof, call for your own officers who were stationed at Falk

I doubt not, my Lords, that there are some important mysteries in the conduct of this affair, which, whenever they are explained, will ac-land Island. Ask the officer who commanded count for the profound silence now observed by the garrison, whether, when he was summoned the King's servants. The time will come, my to surrender, the demand was made in the name Lords, when they shall be dragged from their of the Governor of Buenos Ayres or of his Cathconcealments. There are some questions which, olic Majesty? Was the island said to belong sooner or later, must be answered. The minis- to Don Francisco Buccarelli or to the King of try, I find, without declaring themselves explic-Spain? If I am not mistaken, we have been in itly, have taken pains to possess the public with possession of these islands since the year 1764 an opinion, that the Spanish court have con- or 1765. Will the ministry assert, that, in all stantly disavowed the proceedings of their gov- that time, the Spanish court have never once ernor; and some persons, I see, have been shame- claimed them? That their right to them has less and daring enough to advise his Majesty to never been urged, or mentioned to our ministry? support and countenance this opinion in his speech If it has, the act of the Governor of Buenos from the throne. Certainly, my Lords, there Ayres is plainly the consequence of our refusal never was a more odious, a more infamous false- to acknowledge and submit to the Spanish claims. hood imposed on a great nation. It degrades For five years they negotiate; when that fails, the King's honor. It is an insult to Parliament. they take the island by force. If that measure His Majesty has been advised to confirm and had arisen out of the general instructions congive currency to an absolute falsehood. I beg stantly given to the Governor of Buenos Ayres, your Lordship's attention, and I hope I shall be why should the execution of it have been deferunderstood, when I repeat, that the court of red so long? Spain's having disavowed the act of their governor is an absolute, a palpable falsehood. me ask, my Lords, when the first communication was made by the court of Madrid of their being apprised of the taking of Falkland's Island, was it accompanied with an offer of instant restitution, of immediate satisfaction, and the punishment of the Spanish governor? If it was not, they have adopted the act as their own, and the very mention of a disavowal is an impudent insult offered to the King's dignity. The King of Spain disowns the thief, while he leaves him unpunished, and profits by the theft. In vulgar English, he is the receiver of stolen goods, and ought to be treated accordingly.

Let

If your Lordships will look back to a period of the English history in which the circumstances are reversed, in which the Spaniards were the complainants, you will see how differently they succeeded. You will see one of the ablest men, one of the bravest officers this or any other

History confirms this statement. Adolphus says that when Lord Weymouth inquired "whether Grimaldi had instructions to disavow the conduct of Buccarelli, he received an answer in the negative." -Vol. i., p. 431. It was not until January 22d, 1771, nearly three months after, that the disavowal was made. See Adolphus, i.. 435.

My Lords, if the falsehood of this pretended disavowal had been confined to the court of Spain, I should have admitted it without concern. I should have been content that they themselves had left a door open for excuse and accommodation. The King of England's honor is not touched till he adopts the falsehood, delivers it to his Parliament, and adopts it as his own.

I can not quit this subject without comparing the conduct of the present ministry with that of a gentleman [Mr. George Grenville] who is now no more. The occasions were similar. The French had taken a little island from us [in 1764] called Turk's Island. The minister then at the head of the treasury [Mr. Grenville] took the business upon himself. But he did not nego

tiate. He sent for the French embassador and

made a peremptory demand. A courier was dispatched to Paris, and returned in a few days, with orders for instant restitution, not only of the island, but of every thing that the English subjects had lost.5

Such, then, my Lords, are the circumstances 5 A similar measure of spirit was adopted by the same minister with the Spaniards, who had driven our settlers from Honduras, to whom fourteen days had been allowed; upon which, all was instantly and amicably adjusted.

« AnteriorContinuar »