regard to the prorogation of Parliament, or to state the reasons which may influence his servants in the counsels which they may deem it advisable to offer upon such a subject. Any attempt at that sort of justification is, ac cording to my judgment, in the present instance, totally unnecessary. But I rise to make such replies to the honourable member's questions, as I feel consistent with my public duty, and I am happy that I do feel enabled to af ford a full answer upon those points to which the honourable gentleman appears to attach the most importance. First, then, as to Russia; the honourable gentleman's interrogatory is, whether any direct communication has been received from the court of St. Petersburgh, conformably to a certain article in the treaty recently concluded between that country and France? (that, we understood, which relates to the time for this country's accepting the mediation). Undoubtedly a direct communication has been received from the Russian court, by his majesty's go vernment, containing an offer of mediation between this country and France; but I think it right, at the same time to state, that this communication was unaccompa nied by any copy of the treaty lately concluded, or any of its conditions; but specifically not the article alluded to by the honourable member. This communication was received on the second of this month, and at that time. his majesty's ministers had no knowledge whatever of the terms of the Russian treaty; but least of all of a certain article in that treaty. Nor had they, indeed, any intelligence upon the subject, until they received it through the same medium as that which conveyed it to the public, namely, a French newspaper. Under these circumstances, ministers received the communication I have mentioned from Russia, and to that communication, they returned, what in such a state of things must have been expected, only a conditional answer. What the nature of that answer was, the honourable gentleman would not ask me to state; but I can assure him that the answer of ministers was given in the most perfect ignorance of the Russian treaty, and particularly of the article alluded to by the bonourable gentleman.

The next interrogatory of the honourable gentleman' alluded to America; now, upon this point, I can have no difficulty in communicating to the House and to the public, the fullest information in my power; and I am pecu

place of some importance that persons of ability should be appointed to fill different offices in the service of the publie; and was it not of some importance also, that the legislature should provide that his majesty should not be deprived of the fair exercise of his prerogative, in selecting such only as he thought qualified to fill the offices? This power, the practice of granting places in reversion night unjustly deprive him of in many instances. And in the second place, was it not of some considerable importance, with a view to public economy, that if at any particular time an office should be declared to be useless with respect to the public service, and such as ought to be abolished, was it not of some very material importance, that it should be in the power of the servants of the crown to abolish the office upon the office becoming vacant? There was, for instance, a case that occurred last year, in which it would have been well if the measure, which was then spoken of, had been so long, in force, as that places were entirely free on the death of the present occupant. The place of commissioner to the port of Dublin became vacant by the death of the last officer who filled that place. That was one of the places which was recommended by the committee of finance to abolish. The Duke of Bedford, then Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, being influenced by the same spirit of economy, which operated in the minds of his majesty's confidential advisers in this country, would have abolished the office if it had been i his power so to do; but, he found upon enquiry that a reversion was entailed upon it; he did then all that was in that case left for him to do; he took care that during his administration of the affairs of Ireland, no reversionary interest of that situation should be granted. The right hon. gentleman, however, stated, with reference to what was supposed to have passed in another place, that a noble lord, who already possessed a reversionary interest, might be considered one of the most fit persons to speak upon the 'subject. Now, to make out this case, the right honourable gentleman should at least have proved that a person in such a situation must be completely satisfied that the measure of his desires must of course be full. Until he did this, which would be extremely difficult for him to do, he could not support his proposition. Unfortunately, however, for his argument, an instance was glanced at in the course of the debate, in which the person alluded to VOL. 1.-1897.

45

hal

.

regard to the prorogation of Parliament, or to state the reasons which may influence his servants in the counsels which they may deem it advisable to offer upon such a subject. Any attempt at that sort of justification is, according to my judgment, in the present instance, totally unnecessary. But I rise to make such replies to the honourable member's questions, as I feel consistent with my public duty, and I am happy that I do feel enabled to afford a full answer upon those points to which the honourable gentleman appears to attach the most importance. First, then, as to Russia ; the honourable gentleman's interrogatory is, whether any direct communication has been received from the court of St. Petersburgh, conforiaably to a certain article in the treaty recently concluded between that country and France? (that, we understood, which relates to the time for this coun ry's accepting the mediation). Undoubtedly a direct communication has been received from the Russian court, by his majesty's government, containing an offer of mediation between this country and France : but I think it right, at the some time to state, that this communication was unaccompa nied by any copy of the treaty lately concluded, or any of its conditions; but specifically not the article alluded to by the honourable member. This communication was received on the second of this month, and at that time his majesty's ministers had no knowledge whatever of the terms of the Russian treaty; but least of all of a certain article in that treaty. Nor had they, indeed, any intelligence upon the subject, until they received it through the same medium as that which conveyed it to the public, namely, a French newspaper. Under these circumstances, ministers received the communication I have mentioned from Russia, and to that communication, they returned, what in such a state of things must have been expected, only a conditional answer. What the nature of that answer was, the honourable gentleman would not ask me to state; but I can assure him that the answer of ministers was given in the most perfect ignorance of the Russian treaty, and particularly of the article alluded to by the honourable gentleman.

The next interrogatory of the honourable gentleman alluded to America; now, upon this point, I can have no difliculty in communicating to the House and to the public, the fullest information in my power; and I am pecu

liarly glad of the opportunity which the honourable gentleman has afforded me to do so. But, before I enter into the transaction to which the honourable member's question more particularly refers, I beg to state that any circumstances which may have occurred with regard to America, can in no degree have arisen out of the conduct of his majesty's present ministers for this reason, that finding upon their accession to office certain relations subsisting, between this country and America; finding a treaty pending, though not yet ratified, and the public faith of this country solemnly pledged; they felt no duty so sacred, they saw no line so clear, as not to interfere with the course of these relations; but to proceed according to the impulse given by their predecessors. Whatever our own feelings were upon the merits of the measure, we felt it our duty, and formed our resolution, to give the fullest effect to the stipulations of the treaty which our predecessors had concluded; such, in fact, both collec tively and individually was our determined purpose. Under these considerations, I can assure the House that no alteration whatever was made in the course pursued by our predecessors; nothing whatever was done that could bear on their treaty, or the objects they had in view. No new instructions whatever were sent to our minister at the American court; and as to our naval force off the American coast, they had precisely the same orders as those which prevailed under our predecessors. Upon the conduct of that force I cannot as yet attempt to pronounce an opinion. Until a recent transaction shall be inquired into, and the fullest and most accurate examination shall take place, it would be premature to decide upon it. But whatever the conduct of this naval force, or the nature of this particular transaction may have been, the present mi nisters are no more responsible for it than as the represen tatives of the government. In the present stage of the bu siness, I have nothing more to say upon this question but to add, that the British government have not received, either through its minister at the American court, or through the American ambassador here, any official communication whatever relative to the transaction alluded to by the honourable gentleman. Ministers received the first authentic account of this affair through the American newspapers, transmitted by our minister, which contained the president's proclamation, and in consequence of this VOL. 1.-1807. publication

AT

publication I thought it my duty, no later than this day, to inquire of the American ambassador whether he had any official communication from his government to make upon the subject; but was answered in the negative. In such circumstances, of course, ministers have no communication to make to Parliament on this topic.

Upon these two points, with regard to which the honourable gentleman professed to be particularly anxious, I have endeavoured to answer as fully and satisfactorily as my duty enabled me to do. With respect to the other points to which the honourable gentleman referred, the House must feel that it would be impossible for me, consistently, to state any thing with regard to the measures which he supposes ministers to have taken in conseqizence of the Prussian treaty with France, or as to the object of the expedition which government had lately sent out, particularly as no intelligence had as yet been received from that expedition. Upon another subject of the honourable gentleman's allusion, I mean Turkey, I shall only repeat the words of his majesty's speech at the commencement of the session, namely, “ that his majesty has taken such measures, &c. as may best enable him to take advantage of any favourable opportunity for bringing the hostilities in which he is engaged against the Sublime Porte, to a conclusion consistent with his majesty's honour and the interests of his ally."

The right honourable gentleman observed, that he had communicated as fully upon all the points adverted to by the honourable gentleman, as he was enabled to do consistently with his duty. Having no official communication to make to Parliament; seeing no probability of an event that should render an immediate communication with Parliament necessary, and considering that the public business was over, he could not conceive the reason of acceding to a principle so new, as that of continuing the attendance of members; of preventing a prorogation, particularly at the present season, when, according to the or dinary practice of Parliament, his majesty exercised his unquestionable prerogative in allowing to both Houses a certain recess.

Mr. Whitbread expressed himself obliged to the right honourable gentleman for the candour with which he an swered the questions he had thought it his duty to ask him, but disclaimed any intention to interrogate the right

honourable