Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

29. Expedition to the Scheldt-Adjourned Debate
Lord Wellington's Answer to the Vote of Thanks
Expedition to the Scheldt-Adjourned Debate

April 3. Sir Francis Burdett's Motion respecting Captain Warwick Lake and

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

Lord Chatham .......

18. Dispute with America .....

Disturbances in the Metropolis, in consequence of the Commitment of

Sir Francis Burdett to the Tower.....

Captain Foskett's Petition ....

30. King's Message relating to the Duke of Brunswick

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

737

[ocr errors]

2. Petition from Middlesex for the Release of Sir Francis Burdett, &c.
3. Petition from Middlesex for the Release, of Sir Francis Burdett-
Adjourned Debate....

Motion respecting the late Treasurer of the Post Office in Ireland

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

PAPERS RELATING TO THE EXPEDITION TO THE SCHELDT-Concluded from Ap-

pendix to Vol. 16.

Copy of the Earl of Chatham's Statement of his Proceedings; dated
15th October 1809. Presented to the King, 14th February 1810. 1106
PAPERS relating to Rear Admiral Sir Richard J. Strachan, Bart.

PETITION of the East India Company for Relief .......

from Westminster for the Release of Sir Francis Burdett
- from Captain Foskett .......

.......

1115

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

THE

Parliamentary Debates

During the Fourth Session of the Fourth Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and of the Kingdom of Great Britain the Twenty-first, appointed to meet at Westminster, the Twenty-third Day of January, 1810, in the Fiftieth Year of the Reign of His Majesty King GEORGE the Third. [Sess. 1810.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Friday, March 2, 1810.

[CORN DISTILLATION PROHIBITION BILL.] Upon the order of the day being read, that the House do go into a Committee upon this Bill,

The Earl of Hardwicke, in pursuance of the notice he gave yesterday, conceived it his duty to propose a limited period for the duration of the bill now before their lordships. He had been induced to adopt this mode of conduct, in consequence of the defect of information, how far this measure would be expedient for the interests of the country. If the present bill were limited to the duration of three months, it would afford the House an opportunity of examining the documents which had previously been moved for, and which would enable their lordships to form a correct opinion upon the policy of the measure; he should therefore move the alteration accordingly, in order that the bill might expire in May, and not in September.

Earl Bathurst expressed his doubt whether this alteration would answer its intended purport; and he really apprehended, that persons interested in the event of this bill passing into a law, would thereby be thrown into such uncertainty as would be materially injurious to their interest.

The amendment was then proposed, when a division took place-For the Amendment 18; Against it 21; Majority -3. The bill afterwards passed through the Committee. VOL. XVI.

[THE KING'S ANSWER TO THE CITY OF LONDON RESPECTING THE EXPEDITION TO THE SCHELDT.] The order of the day having been read, the marquis of Lansdown desired, as a preliminary step, that the Narrative presented by lord Chatham to his Majesty might be read. The Narrative was accordingly read by the clerk, upon which,

The Marquis of Lansdown rose to submit the motion of which he had given notice for a previous day, to the consideration of their lordships. He had postponed his motion on the former day, in consequence of the noble earl, the author of the Narrative, having to attend in another place, but he had hoped that on this day the noble earl would have been in his place. He had thought it, however, his duty to desire that the Narrative should be read, in order that their lordships might be in full possession of its contents. It was deeply to be regretted, that the author of the Narrative should have attempted to cast a blot upon that profession, to weaken public confidence in which was to darken the horizon and to dim the prospects of the country. He did not mean now to enter into a discussion of the policy and the conduct of the calamitous Expedition to the Scheldt, that must be reserved till another opportunity; he should therefore in the present instance confine himself to a very limited object. The author of the Narrative which their lordships had just heard read, was one of his Majesty's ministers, with whom his colleagues had daily opportunities of communication;

A

upon that most important and valuable ser vice.-It would be recollected, also, that the ministers who had thus advised his Majesty to refuse inquiry into the petition of his subjects, where inquiry was so imperiously demanded, were the same ministers. who, on a former occasion, when a petition from the same corporation called for inquiry into the disgraceful affair of the convention of Cintra, had advised his Ma

thus coming to ask for inquiry, and to state, that his Majesty was desirous at all times to institute inquiry, where, as in that case, the hopes and expectations of the nation had been disappointed. The same ministers too, who when intending to move the thanks of parliament to a naval commanding officer, upon only hearing it intimated that an officer who commanded a single ship in the fleet intended, not to prefer a charge, but to oppose the Vote of Thanks, immediately instituted a court martial upon the officer in command, yet, who had refused inquiry in the case of this calamitous Expedition to the Scheldt, where so many circumstances demanded it-where it was called for to clear the character of the navy from the reproach cast upon it by the author of the Narrative-where it was called for by the general voice and the universal feeling of the country. Did his Majesty's ministers intend to shield themselves under his Ma

and from whom, having these daily opportunities of communication, it was to be supposed his colleagues must have learnt those circumstances detailed in the Narrative, each of which imperiously demanded inquiry; an inquiry, however, had been deemed unnecessary by his Majesty's confidential servants. It had happened that a corporation amongst the first in the country in importance and dignity, had assembled, for the purpose of consi-jesty to reprove the citizens of London for dering of a petition to his Majesty, that he would be graciously pleased to direct an immediate and effectual inquiry into the causes of the calamitous failure which had attended the Walcheren Expedition, and had determined upon one to that effect, which, in speaking the opinion of that corporation, also spoke the decided and unanimous opinion of the whole country. It had happened also that from some circumstances, a considerable interval elapsed between the determination to present this petition and the delivery of it, giving his Majesty's ministers still further time to inform themselves of the real circumstances attending that Expedition. Was it to be believed, then, that for three months from the time of the arrival of the noble earl, the author of the Narrative, in this country, in September, and the period of delivering the petition to which he had alluded, in December, his Majesty's ministers should have had no communication with their colleague, relative to the cir-jesty's sacred name and authority? He cumstances which had caused the failure of the Expedition? Was it to be believed, that when every voice in England was lifted up to demand inquiry into the causes of these calamities which had afflicted the country-that when every mind in Eng-lieved, that they were ignorant of the senland was intent upon the calamitous circumstances of this Expedition-that there should be nine or ten individuals wholly indifferent to these calamities, and wholly regardless of the public feeling and the public anxiety, and wholly negligent in inquiring into the causes of these evils so generally deplored-and that these nine or ten individuals should be his Majesty's ministers?-Yet their lordships would find, by the Answer given to the city of London, that his Majesty's ministers had advised his Majesty to say, that he had not deemed it necessary to institute any inquiry; and this notwithstanding all the circumstances detailed in the Narrative, and which so loudly demanded an inquiry for the sake of the navy, to remove that stain which had been attempted to be cast

trusted the country would not be deceived by such an artifice, nor suffer them to take advantage of the sanctuary of a temple profaned by such unhallowed steps, and polluted by such hands. Was it to be

timents and opinions of the author of the Narrative? was it to be believed, that, having daily opportunities of communication with the noble earl, the author of the Narrative, one of their colleagues, the master general of the ordnance, and the military commander in chief of the Expedition, they should have neglected to have required him to give them all the information in his power upon the subject of the Expedition; that they should with all their opportunities of information and explanation, have remained in utter ignorance of the opinions and sentiments of their colleagues, in utter ignorance even of many material facts relating to this Expedition? He could not believe that it was in this utter ignorance of the facts and circumstances stated by their colleague in his

« AnteriorContinuar »