the noble lord founded all his arguments]" das (we quote his own words) says upon estimates, while they constantly ar. "When I saw the Indian debt rise to abov gued from results. There were no differ-" 10 millions, bearing interest, and still like ences as to facts. "ly to increase, I thought it my duty to stat

66

Sir Hugh Inglis said, the reason why" to you the propriety of restoring to India government had not participated in the" from your treasury at home, a part o promised payments was, that in 1793, when" that balance; and this led me to state the charter was renewed, hopes were en- "that I was ready to meet the Indian tertained, that the war would very soon be" debt, even at the large amount of 14 at an end; but, unfortunately, those hopes "millions. Every person conversant with had been disappointed, and we had ever "the affairs of India, will concur with Mr since been engaged in war, either with the" Dundas, that the safety of the empire French or the native powers, and some- depends, amongst other things, on the times with both, by which the debt had " comparative magnitude of the debt been enormously increased, and the ex- "He was alarmed, and with reason, when pences of the war had been placed to the" the amount was 10 millions; but, as an debit of the company's accounts, with no "exertion, and with a responsibility of other allowance than the difference be-" which he appears to have felt the weight, tween a war and peace establishment;" he was ready to meet it on the 30th of and yet, from the account made out since June 1801, at the large amount of 14 1793, it would appear; that the company's "millions. However discouraging the dividends had been paid out of the profits prospect may be (alluding to the debt at of their trade. As to a select committee," 16 millions) it is aggravated by circumhe was certain nothing could be done by stances which never existed before. The it that would not be better effected by "establishments are increased, the politihis majesty's ministers forming the board" cal resources absorbed, and it is further of controul. "intended to deprive the company of a

66

66

Mr. Paull replied at some length to the" resource, essential to save it from utter various arguments that had been made" destruction." It is for the noble lord against his intended motion for a select to reconcile these contrary opinions. The committee. The noble lord opposite, (said hon. chairman (Mr. Grant) has said, that the hon. gent.) accuses me of reading the the trade of the company has been profiact rather hastily: to that observation I table; but what trade, I ask, and I ask it shall make no reply. The noble lord confidently? The trade of China has been (Folkestone) who with so much honour to most lucrative; for there we have no terhimself, and advantage to the public, hasritory, no armies, no establishments; but this night seconded and supported my mo- I am ready to meet the hon. gent. and to tions, has made so able a reply, and joined prove, that the investments from Bengal so cordially in my construction of the act, have been purchased with money produced that any observation on my part, would by loans at a high rate of interest, sadonly weaken the arguments of that noble dled with a farther commission of 10 per Jord; happily, too, I am borne out by the cent. to the commercial servants; and that opinion of the right hon. secretary (Fox), the Bengal commerce during the last five of which I am not a little proud. The years, has produced a positive loss of not noble lord has said, that the situation of less than 3 millions sterling in the amount the company in 1802-3 was flourishing, invested; and now the debt and interest prosperous, and happy, and their resources remain, and must remain to the last hour ample, and possessed of the means of ful- of the charter, a debt due in India by the filling their engagements made in 1793. company.-The noble lord and the hon. The present is not the time for the proof chairman, have maintained, that the inof this assertion; but I hold in my hand an crease of the debt has arisen from wars, opinion not likely to be controverted, that Now, sir, primâ facie, the same, in the first of the directors themselves, which I beg place, is contrary to your laws, and the leave to read; it is from the third report argument, unless the wars can be justified, of the select committee, dated in the very a very unsatisfactory one. But I deny the year 1802, that year so triumphantly re- fact; and, if there is one part of lord ferred to by the noble lord. In the third Wellesley's conduct more to blame than report of the select committee of the court another, it was the unprepared state of our of directors, after alluding to the letter of army, in every essential for commencing my lord Melville, they say, “Mr. Dun-active operations, when hostilities com

gent. did not condescend to take the advice he now took the liberty to offer him, he had sufficient experience of the candour and liberality of the house to be convinced that such allegations, thus unsupported by any thing but assertion, would have no weight in their opinion.

menced. So unprepared was lord Lake | their fatal credulity. Under every consifor taking the field, that government was deration of the subject, I must take the forced to means unjustifiable, oppressive, sense of the house on the motions I have and unjust, to enable lord Lake to move this night made. from Cawnpore. Let the requisitions made Mr. Hiley Addington wished that the on the vizier, for elephants, camels, horses, honourable gentleman would withdraw his bullocks, waggons, and bearers to carry motions; because as it was known that the sick and wounded of the army, decide there were no such papers as he called for, the question. I deny again, that to the they were mere nullities, to say no worse. war is to be attributed the alarming state He seriously deprecated the prominent of the debt; it will be found in your sys- disposition manifested so frequently by the tem of finance, in the provision of your in-hon. gent. who spoke last, to asperse and vestments, and in the profuse, wasteful, criminate the character of a noble person, extravagant, illegal expenditure of the not now present to defend himself,—and public money by the late governor-general. this before any document to sustain his I was anxious and eager to abstain from allegations, or any regular enquiry into the all mention of that nobleman on the pre-noble person's conduct was before the sent occasion; but, when causes unfounded house. At least he was sure if the hon. in fact are to go forth to the public, I feel it my duty to state the true causes of the increase of the debt which we so much deplore, however galling they may be to the noble lord alluded to.-Another hon. gent. (Mr. Johstone) has stated this motion as premature, and advised me to stay for the budget. Sir, the budget has nothing to do Dr. Laurence said, that this was a comwith the object I have in view; it is to the mon mode of proving that there were no errors of the system I object. Besides who, such papers by having a return to that I ask, attends to the voluminous accounts effect. He supported the motion of the yearly produced? they are only calculated hon. gent. and observed, that it now apto tire the reader, not to instruct. But, peared the noble lord's flattering statement sir, I repeat again, the correctness of the of the abundantly prosperous state of the accounts, and the sums total, are foreign affairs of the company in 1803, was entireto the object of enquiry I have in view.ly founded upon a prospective supposition The system of finance, of commerce, of of a permanent peace; whereas, in one expence, are all faulty, all defective; and month afterwards, his majesty's message it is to these I wish to apply a remedy was brought down to the house, announthrough the means of a select committee.-cing the explosion of a new war.-Mr. I would willingly comply with the sug- Paull's motions were then put and carried. gestions of the noble lord (Morpeth), did not a sense of duty prevent me. The negatives will prove the breaches of law; and Thursday, February 27. I must persevere in my motions, and di- [WITNESSES' INDEMNITY BILL.]. The vide the house, if they are objected to. order of the day having been read for the One word more, sir, and I have done. The attendance of the Judges (who were all line I am pursuing is to me a troublesome present), to give their answers to the three one, and no personal advantage can pos-questions referred to them, the 1st and 2d sibly result to me from it; on the contrary, of which went to enquire whether, accordI know I subject myself to much obloquy ing to law, a witness could demand to and much inconveniency. But, sir, viewing the evil as I do, and perceiving that if a remedy is not speedily applied, an experiment must be tried, that may level with the dust the public funds of Great Britain, I shall, at all events, do what I feel to be incumbent on me; and, should the house neglect the warning I have given, and shut their eyes to the approaching dan-being interested? ger, gentlemen will lament when too late Lord Chief Justice Mansfield delivered

HOUSE OF LORDS.

answer a question, the answer to which might render him liable to an action for debt, or to a suit for the recovery of the profits of public money? and the 3d, to ascertain whether a witness who, on making a full and fair disclosure, was to be excused from certain debts, could not be legally objected to, on the ground of his

general in their nature, that the Judges could not give a satisfactory answer.

the opinion of the Judges, which, with respect to the first two questions, would, he said he feared, leave their lordships in Lord Eldon said, it would be in the renearly the same state of doubt in which collection of their lordships that he had they were before, although his learned bre- on a former occasion expressed his doubts, thren and himself had devoted as much whether they would derive much precise attention to their consideration as the information from the opinion of the Judges time allotted for the purpose would allow.upon such general questions. The great The Judges were, however, upon those difficulty in his mind, with respect to fram two questions, which they considered to ing more specific questions was, that they be resolved into one, divided in opinion. could not do so without going into the Those who were of opinion that a witness merits of the case which was to come bein such a case could not demur, might fore them by impeachment, and upon be prepared to give a decisive answer to which they ought to preserve their minds that effect, but with respect to those who clear from all previous opinions upon the were of a contrary opinion, that opinion subject, until they came before them rewas qualified by a great number of excep-gularly in evidence. tions, which it was not their province to Lord Holland objected to the noble descant upon under the general terms of lord (Auckland's) question, on the ground the questions, and which, indeed, it would of its being too particular, and protested be scarcely possible for them, under a ge- against the admission of the Judges' anneral question, to give a decided opinion swer, because it recognized a principle upon. With respect to the 3d question, which he contended was unparliamentary, they were unanimously of opinion, that a viz. that questions referred to the Judges witness in the situation described, could should be of a particular and not of a genot be repelled on the ground of being neral nature. He was decidedly of a coninterested, as whatever was offered, on trary opinion, and had no hesitation in saycondition of his making a full and fair dising, that it had been the uniform practice closure, could legally make no difference of parliament before the trial of Mr. Hastwith respect to his evidence, he being ings, and that it was essential to the prebound by his oath, by law, morality, and servation of the independence and dignity honour, to declare the truth, the whole of their lordships' house, the highest juditruth, and nothing but the truth. cature of the kingdom, to refer no questions to the Judges of a particular nature, but to consult them on the general point of law. All questions that it could become the house to refer to the learned Judges, were in his opinion reducible to these three heads. 1st, a question of pure abstract law, illustrated by an A. and B. case. 2dly, a question on the practice of the courts below. 3dly, a question on the construction of a particular act of parliament.-If, therefore, this was sound constitutional doctrine, and the Judges were permitted to decline answering questions because they were general, it would follow, either that the house must depart from the principles of their ancestors and the wholesome constitutional maxim of confining their questions to general points, or the attendance of Judges would become It being suggested by the clerk that the nugatory and useless.-The reason of the answers of the Judges should be delivered principle laid down, was obvious. If every in writing, they were accordingly deliver-particular case was referred to the Judges, ed. The answer to the third question was similar to that given verbally by lord chief justice Mansfield. The answer to the other two questions stated, that they were so

Lord Auckland expressed his disappointment at the opinion which he had just heard from the learned Judges, which he had expected would have been decisive one way way or the other. In order, however, to obtain an answer, which might perhaps be all that would be necessary, with reference to the bill, he begged leave to propose another question, whether, according to law, any officer or agent employed under any officer entrusted with the application of the public money, could demur to answer to any question relative to the matter in issue, the answer to which might render him liable to any suit respecting the application of such money? This question, however, he was very willing to withdraw, if any other noble lord suggested a better mode of attaining the same object.

we should not be consulting them for the purpose of gaining information upon which we might form our own opinions, but we should be asking them advice upon our

and he had an idea, if it was not carried into effect by any other person, of propo

own conduct, and consulting them how to regulate it according to law. Were that the practice adopted, and they were re-sing a general law upon the subject, conquired to give opinions on the case, and tained in a short bill, according to which, not simply consulted on the general points the evidence given by any person respectof law, there could be no reason stated why ing any matter in issue, should not be after the whole body of evidence on a trial, or wards made use of in any way against him. any other proceeding, might not be referred The Lord Chancellor (Erskine), after to the Judges, and they required to advise briefly stating the circumstances which the house what verdict to give. Such a gave rise, on a former occasion, to putting doctrine and such a practice would be these questions to the Judges, observed, derogatory to the dignity of the house; that it was clear, from the statement of subversive of the law and usage of parlia-the learned chief Justice, that the learnment; and a virtual surrender of the inde-ad Judges had not really declined to pendence and dignity of the highest judi- answer the question, on account of its cature in the country, to the practice and being of too general a nature, but that rules of the inferior courts. He was they had differed in opinion with respect therefore convinced that the learned Judges attended on the woolsacks, to furnish their lordships with such information as they might feel necessary towards regulating their conduct, but not for the purpose of being consulted as to what that conduct should be and being convinced that the recognition of the impropriety of general questions being put to them, would be an acknowledgement that the object of their attendance was for the latter and not the former purpose, and that such acknowledgement would be pregnant with serious evils to the law and usage of parliament, he felt bound to protest to the admission of the answer given in in writing by the Judges.

to the subject matter which that question involved, and, therefore, they could not return a general answer, either one way or the other. He looked up with reverence and respect to the opinion of the Judges; he wished to have their opinion upon sucli a question; the house had a right to call for their opinion. The variance between the verbal statement of the learned chief Justice, and the answer delivered in at the table, was obvious to the house; it was also clear that the difference of opinion amongst the learned Judges was, not as to the form of the question put to them, but upon the merits of the question itself. Under these circumstances, therefore, he thought that the house was entitled to call for an opinion from the Judges, and, as they could not agree, that they should deliver their opinions seriatim. He, at the same time, wished to pay the highest deference to the opinion, upon this subject, of his noble and learned friend (lord Eldon).

Lord Grenville perfectly concurred in what had fallen from the noble and learned lord on the woolsack. He wished to pay every respect to the learned Judges, but their lordships were entitled to an opinion upon the questions referred to that learned body; and, however painful or unpleasant the task, they must do their duty. He concurred in the propriety of hearing the Judges seriatim.

Earl Stanhope said, his noble friend had mistaken the practice of parliament, with respect to the questions referred to the Judges. If his noble friend had, like himself, endured the misery of attending for six years, during the trial of Warren Ilastings, he would have known that it had been constantly the practice to refer questions to the Judges, upon specific points, and individual cases. He could not, at the same time, agree with his noble friend, as to the general propriety of requiring an answer from the learned Judges, to a question, respecting an abstract point of law. Such a question might involve both negative and positive relations, and how was it possible for the Lord Hawkesbury also agreed that the learned Judges to give a general answer, Judges should be heard seriatim; the only of yes or no, to a question, which they question appeared to him to be as to could not, indeed, answer, without ma- the mode of getting rid of the answer to king a thousand, or, perhaps, ten thousand, the first two questions which had been exceptions to the general rule laid down? delivered at the table. It occurred to him With respect to the bill itself, he was of that the best inode of doing this, would opinion, that there should not be a dif-be to consider that answer as not having ferent law for A. to what there was for B.; been delivered, and that it should be unVOL. VI. Q

derstood that the learned Judges were to Mr. Francis moved for, extracts of a deliver their opinion upon the question, letters or accounts received from the p as if no such answer had been given. With sidéncy of Bombay, relative to the sum respect to what had fallen from his noble 31,25944 Bombay rupees, inserted in t friend (lord Holland) as to the proceed-account of their disbursements, from t ings of the house being controlled by the year ending the 30th April 1803, and sa opinion of the Judges upon specific points, to be money lent to the Guicowar. Lo that opinion was not sanctioned by pre-Morpeth stating that there was no obje cedents, one of which occurred to him at tion to the motion, the same was agre the moment-the case of Dr. Sacheverell, to.-On the motion of lord H. Petty, in which the house acted in direct opposi-was ordered, that there be laid before th tion to the unanimous opinion of the house, an account of any offices in Irelan Judges. As to the idea started by the that may have been granted to two or mo noble earl (Stanhope) of a general law to persons, for their concurrent lives, wit prevent the evidence of witnesses from benefit of survivorship.-On the motion being used against themselves, he thought lord H. Petty, it was ordered, that the it would not have the effect which the be laid before the house an account of a noble earl proposed, as, if the witnesses the duties retained and not drawn back, o were compelled to disclose facts, that dis- the exports of foreign and colonial good closure might afford a clue for proving from Great Britain to Ireland, during th those facts against them. years 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 1805, an to the 6th of January 1806. As likewis a similar account of duties on similar ex ports, from Ireland to Great Britain, dow to 5th January 1806.-The secretary a war moved for leave to bring in a bill fo

Lord Auckland withdrew his motion. The Earl of Radnor thought the Judges ought to be called upon to deliver their opinions seriatim.

Lord Eldon said, he felt it incumbent upon him to state, that he gave too posi-extending the liberty of enlisting foreig tive an opinion upon the point involved in soldiers into the service of this country the bill. He had said, that there was no and for indemnifying those by whom th doubt that a witness had no right to demur enlistments had been made. The righ to a question, the answer to which might hou. gent. stated the fact of an excess to involve him in a civil suit; that opinion he the extent of 3,000 men, beyond the promust now retract, as he found there were visions of the former act, having lately doubts upon the subject amongst persons taken place in recruiting the German le of high legal authority. He concurred in gion, while in Hanover; and that it was opinion that the Judges should be heard deemed expedient that no time should be seriatim, and therefore moved that the lost in acquainting parliament of this cirJudges, having given a decided opinion in cumstance, and asking indemnity. Leave the negative as to the third question re- was accordingly given to bring in the bill. ferred to them; and it having been stated-Sir P. Stephens brought in the marine that they differed in opinion as to the mutiny bill, which was read a first time other two questions; that they should be and ordered to be read a second time toheard seriatim úpon those questions, and morrow.-On the motion of lord Morpeth, that they should attend to-morrow for the a variety of papers, comprising the details purpose of delivering their opinions.This of the revenue and expenditure of the dif motion was agreed to, and on the motion offerent presidencies of India, were ordered lord Holland the further consideration of to be laid on the table, preparatory to the the bill was postponed till Tuesday, for which day the lords were ordered to be summoned.

bringing forward of the India budget.-On the motion of Mr. Fitzgerald, the Irish lands partition bill went through a committee.--On the motion of lord Temple, the house went into a committee on the Greenland whale fisherv acts. After some conversation between Mr. Lee, lord Tem ple, and Mr. Vausittart, a resolution was agreed to, that leave be given to vessels engaged in the Greenland whale fishery, to complete their number of men at certain ports for the present season,—On the mo