before the House, hours should have been | passed in endeavouring to fix upon ministers the charge of negligence. In suggesting the course expressed in his motion, he also had it in view to prevent that disgraceful Letter from appearing on the Journals of the House. He thought the motives of ministers were well directed in so speedily preparing so large a force, to ensure the peace of the metropolis, and enforcing the orders of the House. He did not know that he should have acted differently from them, considering the heavy responsibility attached to their conduct. This was not a moment to pass a censure on their conduct. In a short time he trasted the electors of Westminster would see the conduct of the hon. baronet in its true light. If it was the wish of the House, he had no objection to withdraw his amendment. The Speaker observed, that could not be done without the consent of the seconder. Mr. D. Giddy consented. parliament. It was no new doctrine with him, inasmuch as he had opposed the prin ciple seven or eight years ago in the case of courts of inquiry, where decisions were made and judgments pronounced, by those who were not sworn themselves, nor had the power of administering oaths to witnesses. Where the law was settled for entertaining certain defined offences, such as libels, he was persuaded, the only just, and, of course, constitutional course, was to refer them to the disposal of the competent jurisdictions, and not risk the violation of a positive charter, by a summary punishment inflicted without a due trial. He did not think that it was legal in that House to employ a military force for the execution of its warrant-a measure which, he understood, was adopted in the case of the hon. bart., many soldiers having entered the house of sir Francis Burdett, with the serjeant at arms. But above all, he was convinced that the House would more efficaciously uphold Mr. Whitbread would not agree to the its dignity, by proving to the people that amendment not being put. their actions were strictly correct and paMr. Gooch was sorry that the amend-triotic, than by any attempt to restrain the -ment was not adopted. He must at the popular discussion upon such actions, same time take an opportunity of declaring, under the shallow pretext of a disputed that no resolutions of that House would be and undefined privilege. strong enough to express his abhorrence of the hon. baronet's conduct. What opinion would any man of honour entertain of that baronet's conduct after having forfeited his word to the serjeant at arms. He never had but one opinion of him. He was persuaded that it had always been his .wish to produce such a crisis as this. Lord Cochrane felt conscious that he could not be charged with any desire to throw the country into a state of intestine commotion, however he might feel it his duty to disapprove of some part of the conduct of that House. The question immediately before the House could not be fully considered without reverting to others of a nature to call forth the most serious deliberation. For his own part, he was free to state, that in his judgment, the House of Commons was not warranted in committing Mr. John Gale Jones for an offence cognizable by the laws of the country, and that its officer in the execution of a warrant issued by its order was not justified in breaking into the house of any of his Majesty's subjects. The crown enjoyed its prerogative, as well as that House its privileges; yet the crown never was the judge of any violation of that prerogative, such an attack was canvassed by VOL. XVI. Mr. Bathurst said that it appeared from the evidence of the serjeant at arms, that it was the civil power that first entered sir F. Burdett's house. It was possible, however, that their officer was mistaken. The noble lord might have been in the house, and known better. He wished that it should be made part of the motion, that the object of the House having been gained by the imprisonment of the honourable baronet, it did not think proper to proceed further. Sir C. Burrell was astonished to hear any imputations thrown upon the military, whose conduct had been most exemplary. Their forbearance on the disgraceful insults offered to them by a rascally mob deserved the highest commendation.There was not one decent man to be found among those who engaged in these scandalous scenes. There was, however, it would seem, no want of assassins among that vile crew. Last night an officer was fired at in the purlieus of the House by a scoundrel; the ball passed through his hat, and had well nigh annihilated him. He condemned the conduct of sir F. Burdett from first to last. Had he been in the situation of that person, he would have gone quietly to the Tower, sooner than 2 S endanger the shedding of one drop of blood. Mr. Wilberforce was still impressed with the propriety of the course he pursued on the former occasion, in voting for the reprimand. He believed it would have made a far different impression upon the hon. baronet than was made by the committal to the Tower. He had seen an elevated character approach to that bar in order to be reprimanded, with great apparent levity; but he soon saw him so humbled by the commanding and impres sive censure of the chair, that he departed lowered, depressed, and penitent. He did think that the amendment of the Chancellor of the Exchequer could be so modified, as to remove the objections which were entertained to the term aggravation." Mr. Boyle defended ministers from the aspersion of their opponents. It was most mischievous, in his opinion, to attribute all the calamities, as they were called, of the late riotous proceedings to their misconduct, rather than to the jacobinical spirit which had so recently manifested itself. The question was loudly called for, and strangers were excluded. After strangers had been excluded from the gallery, the question of adjournment was not pressed to a division. Before we were re-admitted, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had proposed his resolution of censure upon the Letter of sir F. Burdett to the Speaker of the House of Commons, which stated the said letter to be an aggravation of the former offence committed by the hon. baronet. The right hon. gent. then added that if he could thereby insure unanimity, he would withdraw the words of reference to former proceedings. Mr. Whitbread, on this, declared that he could not agree to the resolution with those words, because, having contended, that no offence had been committed by the Letter and Argument laid upon the table by the member for Somersetshire, he could not say that that offence had been aggravated, which, in his opinion, had never existed. He was ready to admit, that the Letter to the Speaker was a high breach of the privileges of the House. Whatever doubt might be entertained of the legality of the commitment of Mr. Gale Jones, or of the warrant against sir F. Burdett, or of the expediency of resorting to either of those measures, there could be no doubt that this was a case in which the House was aggrieved; and where redress could not be sought elsewhere. The House must, therefore, of necessity, take cognizance of it itself. It had been objected to him and others, in the course of the night's debate, that they had grown confident respecting the mode of executing the warrant, from their knowledge of the event: to this he would answer for one, that he had expressed his opinion upon the force of the Speaker's warrant, if issued upon proper grounds, in a conversation he had held with the serjeant at arms, whom he accidentally met, before that officer had ever been at the house of sir F. Burdett. Upon the question having been then proposed to him, how he would act in such a case? he had said he would immediately wait upon sir F. Burdett, and ask him how he intended to conduct himself? If he intended to go voluntarily, that the utmost courtesy as to the mode should be used. If he wished for a nominal force, for the purpose of establishing his principle and maintaining his action, it might be instantly applied without difficulty or molestation; if he would not yield except to actual force, that the serjeant should forthwith collect such a force as would overpower him, and render resist ance hopeless. The honour of sir F. Burdett had misled the serjeant into a supposition, that he would accompany him to the Tower the next morning; nor was the serjeant to blame for having so conceived of the intentions of sir F. Burdett, but it was too much to say that sir F. Burdett had broke his word with the serjeant, Upon the whole, Mr. Whitbread said that he was willing to adopt any parliamentary phrase, however strong, to characterize the Letter addressed to the Speaker, provided no term of reference to any former proceeding was inserted; for the Letter itself he thought exceedingly ill composed, and highly offensive. The Solicitor General for Scotland was desirous of retaining the original words. Mr. Whitbread could not consent to the word aggravation, and proposed "flagrant," as a parliamentary word, and at the same time a word sufficiently strong; and that the expression should be," flagrant breach of the privileges of the House." Mr. Tierney wished for an unanimous decision, which he thought might be ob tained if the Chancellor of the Exchequer would make interest with the solicitor general for Scotland to give up the word | shown in making up the list. He there"aggravation." Mr. Wilberforce thought the mode proposed by the hon. gent. (Mr. Whitbread) would be a more marked expression of the sense of the House than the retaining the words of reference proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. Owen was of the same opinion. Mr. Adam expressed a similar opinion. Mr. Giles thought the House should pass a substantive condemnation of the Letter without the words of reference. The Solicitor General for Scotland, disclaimed any wish pertinaciously to insist upon his opinion. fore, thought an inquiry was necessary. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was convinced it would be found, that there was no foundation for the statement which had been handed to the hon. gent. He agreed however, in the necessity of inquiry, and moved for the appointment of a select Committee for that purpose, which was agreed to. HOUSE OF LORDS. Thursday, April 12. [FOREIGN CORPS.] The Earl of Liverpool presented a return of the effective The Chancellor of the Exchequer was ex-strength of the foreign corps in the service tremely desirous of unanimity upon this occasion, and wished, therefore to adopt the suggestion of the hon. gent. (Mr. Whitbread). In order however that it might not appear on the Journals that the original words relative to aggravation had been left out, he requested he might be allowed to propose the words suggested by the hon. gent. as a part of the original motion. Mr. Whitbread consented. The Speaker requested to be informed of the wish of the House, as to whether the Letter of sir Francis Burdett should be entered upon the Journals, observing, that there were precedents both ways, and that it was entirely optional with the House. It appearing to be the general sentiment that the Letter should not be inserted on the Journals, the Speaker said he would give directions accordingly.-It being also understood that the Amendments moved should not appear on the Journals, the Speaker said he would give directions accordingly, and the question was put as an original motion, "That it is the opinion of this House, that the said Letter is a high and flagrant breach of the privileges of the House; but it appearing from the report of the serjeant at arms attending this House, that the warrant of the Speaker for the commitment of sir Francis Burdett to the Tower has been executed, this House will not, at this time, proceed further on the said Letter." Agreed nem. con. [EXCHEQUER BILLS.] Mr. Whitbread said, that a statement had been handed to him, from which it appeared, that on the day appointed for the holders of Exchequer Bills to attend at the Exchequer Bill office, for the purpose of delivering them to be funded, persons were admitted by a private door before the public door was opened, and that great partiality was of Great Britain, and explained to their lordships the difference between the num ber as appearing in the account he then presented to the House; namely, 31,000, and the number as stated in the army estimates, namely 23,000. In the former the West India regiments had been included, which were excluded from the army estimates under this head, and which did not properly come under the denomination of foreign corps; these amounted to about 7,000 men. In the return also was included the 60th regiment, which was excluded from this head in the army estimates. This regiment consisted of five battalions, amounting to about 5,000 men, a large portion of whom were foreigners. In the army estimates, likewise under this head the 97th regiment was included, which was excluded, from this return, and he thought properly excluded, as the regiment chiefly consisted of Irish. Thus it would be found, that excluding the West India regiments and the 60th regiment, the foreign corps would amount to about 18,000. The Earl of Rosslyn observed, that the 60th regiment could not be properly classed amongst foreign corps, as the greater part of the officers were British, who were promoted in common with the officers of other regiments. It was The order of the day having been read, Lord King said, if any apology was necessary for his introducing this subject, it would be found in the act of the 44th of the King, relative to the introduction of foreign troops into the country. only within the last ten years that foreign troops had been stationed in the country, without even the pretext of any immediate fear of invasion; and particularly that foreign generals had been employed on the staff in this country. Such had been the constitutional jealousy upon this subject previously entertained, that it was only upon particular emergencies, and under special circumstances, that foreign troops were allowed to enter the country. By the act of the 29th Geo. 2 a corps of this description had been formed for service in America, but it was specially enacted, that the colonel should be a natural born subject of his Majesty. Subsequently there was an act made to allow of certain Hessian and Hanoverian troops remaining in the country, then under the fear of invasion. In the American war also, there had been a communication made to parliament on the subject of Hessian and Hanoverian troops coming into the country, and an act was specially passed. In all these acts, however, the greatest caution was used, and the most watchful constitutional jealousy appeared. But within the last ten years a system of employing foreign troops and foreign generals had grown up, which he could not but consider as highly unconstitutional and improper. By the act of the 44th of the King, the employment of regiments of foreign troops in the country to a limited extent was legalized, and also the appointment of foreign officers therein; the reason assigned for which was, that the troops might have officers acquainted with their manners and language. This was a perfectly good and intelligible reason, but it was evident, from the continued use of the word in the provisions of that act, that the act was only intended to apply to and authorize the appointment of foreign regimental officers and not to the employment of foreign generals. And he could not but consider, that the employment of foreign generals in Great Britain could only be sanctioned by a strained and forced construction of the act, which the object of it, as designated in the preamble, could by no means warrant. It was true, there were general words towards the conclusion of the act, the meaning of which was doubtful; but if they were to be construed to authorize the appointment of foreign generals, as at present upon the staff, they must be taken to go much further, and to sanction the appointment of a foreigner to any military command even that of commander in chief. Nay, (and he threw this out for the serious consideration of the noble lords opposite,) his Majesty might under this construction of the act appoint a catholic commander in chief, He provided that catholic was an alien. observed that this act passed on the 16th of July, a period of the session when little or no attention could be paid to it, and when it was probably not considered with any deliberation adequate to its importance. Their lordships were aware, that by the act of settlement, the appointment of a foreigner to any place of trust or profit under the crown was rendered illegal. Previous to that act in the early part of the reign of William 3, there had been some distinguished foreigners employed as generals in the British service, particularly marshal Schomberg, who held a high command in Ireland. The act of settlement, however rendered that practice illegal, and it so continued, unless it was to be considered as legalized by the general words of the act of the 44th of the King, to which he had referred. He could not but consider the appointment of foreign generals on the staff as highly objectionable, and more peculiarly so, that they should have the command of districts, and thereby have the command of British generals and our native troops. There appeared also to be a very improper partiality shewn towards these foreign troops and generals. It appeared on the face of the returns, that the expense of the foreign cavalry was stated at 471. per man, whilst that of our own cavalry amounted to only 441. per man. In the account likewise of the charges for recruiting, there appeared a great disproportion, the charge being 145,0004. for our own troops, amounting to 174,000 men; whilst in the estimate for recruiting the foreign troops the charge was 50,000l. for only 23,000 men. With respect to the foreign officers also, it appeared that the whole of those, who were on the staff, were either colonels or lieutenant-colonels on full pay; whilst half our own officers on the staff were colonels or lieutenant-colonels on half pay; and it was known that, by a regulation, those officers on half pay who were appointed on the staff lost their half pay, whilst those who were in full pay retained it. He had thought it right to call their lordships' attention to this subject, conceiving, as he did, that the employment of such a number of foreign troops was in these times extremely impolitic if not highly dangerous. Many of them were natives of countries now under the dominion of the enemy, and might have to fight against their countrymen in the service of the enemy. This was a situation in which men ought not to oppose the motion: and upon this ground his lordship moved, That the other orders of the day be now read. be placed. It was holding out a great | the British and foreign cavalry, it merely temptation to them, whilst on the other arose from a different mode of making up hand they could have no interest in the the accounts in this part of the kingdom welfare of the country which they served, and in Ireland. As to the statement reand but little even in its political inde- lative to the foreign generals being alpendence. He was however, chiefly de- lowed their full pay, there could be no sirous of taking up the question upon a fair comparison upon this point, because constitutional ground; and in this point the regulation that officers enjoying half of view he could not but consider it as pay, which was considered in the nature highly unconstitutional, that foreign ge- of a pension, should give it up on being nerals should be employed, in the coun-appointed to the staff; and that officers on try, and still more that they should be ap- full pay, which was considered as pay pointed to the command of districts where for actual service, should retain it on-bethey had the command of our own na-ing placed on the staff, applied equally to tional troops. His lordship concluded by the British and foreign generals. As to moving a resolution declaratory of the the policy of employing foreign troops in impropriety of thus employing foreign our service, he had not conceived, until generals. he heard the noble lord give notice of his The Earl of Liverpool did not think that motion, that there existed a doubt upon the noble lord had laid any sufficient the subject, and with the enemy with ground for his motion. With respect to whom we had to contend, and under the the facts relative to the introduction of present circumstances of Europe, he was foreign troops, the noble lord was correct convinced that the employment of foreign in stating that an act was passed in the troops, to a limited extent, was highly pofirst year of the present war, in conse-litic and expedient. He should therefore quence of the Hanoverian troops coming over to this country (Hanover having been at that time seized by the enemy) for the purpose of legalizing their introduction here; and the reason of the late period of passing the act was, that the occasion of the troops coming here had but then just taken place. [It was, however, observed from the other side, that the act of the 44th of the king was passed the year after the commencement of the war, and the earl of Liverpool acknowledged that he was mistaken.]-The principle of this act was recognized in another act passed in 1806, when the noble lords opposite were in administration, whom the noble lord (King) usually supported. The former act allowed the introduction of foreign troops into the country, to an amount not exceeting 10,000 men, and the latter not exceeding 16,000 men. Thus far, therefore, the constitutional jealousy of introducing foreign troops was waved by the late administration, and the measure was sanctioned by the legislature: as to the appointment of foreign generals on the staff, it was of essential use with reference to the service of the foreign troops, and he did not conceive there was or that there could be any legal objection to their appointment. They had not, how ever, the command of districts, as supposed and asserted by the noble lord. With respect to the difference which ap. peared between the expense per man of The Earl of Rosslyn observed, with respect to the act of 1800, that the introduction of it by his noble friends, then in administration, was rendered necessary in consequence of the number of Hanoverian troops who returned from the expedition to the Elbe, having become greatly increased beyond the number who went there, through the unfortunate result of that expedition. On the arrival of that expedition in Hanover a proclamation in the name of his majesty, as elector of Hanover, was issued, calling upon the Hanoverians to join the British standarda great number did so, and the German Legion, which went out about 5,000 strong, was increased to 10 or 12,000 men. In consequence of the result of that expedition, it became of course absolutely necessary to pass an act, in order that these additional troops might be legally em ployed in the British service. His lordship then entered into some details, shewing that it had been erroneously supposed that the expense of the foreign troops, particularly the German Legion to which he more particularly adverted, was more per man than that of the British troops.. With respect to the employment of the foreign generals, he did not consider himself competent to give an opinion upon the construction of the act of the 44th of |