tude; and although government were repeatedly urged by those who preferred force to every other argument, to take the most rigorous means for suppressing those disturbances, yet ministers did hope, (and thank God ! their hopes in this respect were realized,) that without adopting any violent measures, they would be able to suppress those disturbances. Many measures were under contemplation for effectually tranquillizing that country by measures of conciliation; and among the rest, that plan was suggested which I had the honour of bringing before the house. We considered that it would operate powerfully to the increase of our army and navy; and hoped that it would give a vent to the superabundant population of that country, and draw from the very sources of discontent and tumult the means of adding to the strength and security of the empire. When his majesty heard me state the reasons for this measure, which 1 first intended to engraft on the mutiny bill, he expressed his consent. Afterwards a detailed dispatch was written to the lord lieutenant of Ireland, informing his grace of the measures in contemplation for the catholics. This dispatch was laid before his majesty, who certainly then ex. pressed his dissent. The cabinet then humbly represented to his majesty their reasons for pressing the measure, and considering it of such importance. The king did certainly show a degree of reluctance at the time, but finally consented. When his majesty's assent was thus obtained, the dispatch was sent over to the lord-lieutenant, for the purpose of having the contents of it explained to the catholic deputies. A meeting of the catholics was assembled for the purpose of receiv. ing this information; and Mr. Elliot, the Irish secretary, was asked by one of them (Mr. O'Connor), whether it was the intention of government merely to pass the law that was promised in 1793, or whether it was intended to allow the catholics to rise to all military offices, including the staff. Mr. Elliot was not then able to answer the question; but the catholics un. derstood by the dispatch, that they were not to be excluded from any situation in the army. This question having been communicated to ministers by Mr. Elliot, a second dispatch was drawn up, removing Mr. Elliot's doubt, and authorising him to give a decided answer in the affirmative to Mr. O'Connor's question. This second dispatch was laid before his majesty, and his majesty returned it without any objection or comment. It was, therefore, immediately forwarded to Ireland. However, upon the point some differences of opinion did arise. Doubts were entertain ed by some members of the ca binet, as to the extent of this measure, who declared that they were not, in the first instance, aware of the full extent of the measure, and to that extent they strongly expressed their objection; but the dispatch had been previously transmitted to the duke of Bedford. On the Wednesday following, after the bill had been read a first time in the house, I attended the levee ; and his majesty, after conversing with me about my department, asked me what business was before the house that day? I answered, that instead of introducing the concessions to the catholics in the mutiny-bill, it had been judged better to to introduce them in a separate bill, which was to be read a second time that day. His majesty then asked, whether the bill was to be precisely the same as the Irish act of 1793? I stated the difference to be what I communicated to his majesty some days before in the dispatch addressed to the duke of Bedford, and repeated the reasons which appeared to me to justify that difference; and here I must acknowledge that his majesty did express his disapprobation of the measure: but although his majesty did so express his disapprobation, still I did not conceive the consent withdrawn which he had originally given to the introduction of this measure, and I was very naturally the less inclined to think so from this circumstance, that lord Grenville had an audience of his majesty after I left him, and his majesty mentioned not one word on the subject to my noble friend.Upon the following day also I saw his majesty, but heard nothing further of his objection, nor did I for the whole of the week, although I had frequent opportunities of hearing from, and some conversations with, the king. In consequence of an unfortunate event which occurred in my family, I was for some days absent from business and this house, and that absence produced a postponement of the order for the second reading of this bill. During this period I had not seen his majesty, but understood that he had communicated to lord Grenville his decided objection to the measure referred to, and that his majesty conceived the extent of it to be far beyond that to which he had originally given his consent. From that circumstance I was led to suspect that I had misunderstood his majesty. I ac cordingly demanded an audience, in order to use my endeavours for the purpose of satisfying his majesty's mind upon the subject; but my endeavours had not the effect of removing his majesty's objec tions, and I had the regret to find that I had misunderstood his majesty, or that he had completely misunderstood me. However, from an anxious wish to avoid giving any pain to his majesty's feelings, I endeavoured, in concert with my colleagues, so to modify the bill as to reconcile it to his majesty's wishes. But after a good deal of deliberation we found that it could not be so modified as to obviate his objections, without destroying the vital essence of the measure without doing away that which would be satisfactory to the catholics, or likely to produce any of the important consequences which we had in view upon its original introduction: we therefore proposed: to abandon it altogether, in deference to the feelings of his majesty. Having agreed to give up this bill altogether, we did at the same time feel it necessary, for the vin dication of our character, to insert a minute in the proceedings of the cabinet, stating the grounds upon which we were induced to give up the measure; that we would not press any proceeding which might appear to be hostile to his majesty's feelings; but that, from a just solicitude for the interests of this empire, we must consistently reserve to ourselves the right of submitting at all times, for his decision, such measures as we might deem adviseable and expedient for the be nefit of Ireland. Now, in a garbled extract from this minute, which has appeared in the newspapers, the grounds upon which we we were induced to abandon the bill, and the words "for his majesty's decision," were altogether left out. The object of this omission was easily intelligible. It served to give a false colour to the transaction, and was calculated, therefore, to answer the purpose of the writer, who thought proper to publish an artful mutilation of a confidential paper. With regard to the propriety of inserting this minute, I would appeal to any man of right feeling, whether, in justice to the king and to ourselves, we could abstain from recording the ground upon which we acted. I say, nothing can more strongly manifest our deference for the king's opinion, and our disposition to act with frankness and candour towards his majesty, than this precise minute; which only meant to reserve to ourselves the right which belongs to any individual member of parliament, of bringing forward any measure which he may think necessary for the public interest. But what will the house think of a proposition being distinctly made to us, tantamount to an absolute surrender of that right? Not contented with the sacrifice, which I have so often mentioned, to the feelings of the king; it was actually proposed to us, not only that we should withdraw the latter part of the minute, but also substitute in its place a written obligation of a directly opposite nature, pledging ourselves never to bring forward again the measure we had abandoned; nay more, never to propose any thing connected with the catholic question. Much as this proposition may astonish the house, I feel fully satisfied, from the opportunity which my official communication has afforded me of judging of the nature of his opinions, that his majesty is actuated by the purest motives. Of the benevolent intentions of his majesty for the interests of his people in this transaction, so far as he is personally concerned, I cannot entertain the slightest doubt; but of his advisers I can say nothing. But I will appeal to this house, and the country, whether such an obligation could be patiently discussed, much less subscribed, by any man who ever entertained a correct notion of public duty, or who was susceptible of a feeling worthy of a respectable public station. Need I add, that this proposition was such as my colleagues and myself found it utterly impossible to assent to? and having respectfully commu nicated our dissent from it to the king, we the next day received an intimation from his majesty that he must look out for other ministers. These ministers he suc ceeded in finding; and on Wednesday last my colleagues and I delivered up the seals of office to his majesty. In the statement I have made I have shown, I hope to the satisfac tion of the house, these three important facts: 1st, That the bill referred to was not proposed in this house, until his majesty was fully apprized of it ;-2dly, That, whatever misunderstanding might have arisen, the fault was not with us, as his majesty was afforded ample opportunity, in the documents laid before him, and in his communications with us, completely to understand the object of the bill ;— . and 3dly, That, when we found the bill was disagreeable to his majesty's feelings, we, in deference to these feelings, immediately abandoned it; accompanying that abandonment by a written minute, frankly intimating to his majesty our future intentions, expressing, however, our resolution of submit ting those intentions at all times for his majesty's decision ;" and declining a compact which was little likely to be advantageous to him, as to be honourable to us.If his majesty should authorise his present ministers to lay before the house any further information or documents on this subject, it will afford me considerable gratification. Every discussion of the matter will be entirely agreeable to me. Mr. Brand give notice, that he would, on Monday fortnight, move certain resolutions expressive of his opinion of the conduct of the late administration, and of the grounds upon which his majesty had been advised to dismiss his late servants, an account of which will be found in the next chapter. Adjourned to Wednesday April 8. CHAPTER VI. His Majesty's Answer to his Faithful Commons-Petition from Sion College-Delate on Mr. Brand's Motion respecting the New Administration.-Debates in the House of Lords on the same Subject-Mr. Lyttleton's Motion on the same Subject-Thanks to Sir Samuel Auchmuty, c. -Sir Christopher Hawkins ordered to be prosecuted-Speech on the Dissolution of Parliament. A PRIL 8th, the house of commons met pursuant to adjournment; the new administration having taken their seats, and about 30 new members having been sworn, lord George Thynne informed the house from the bar that his majesty had been waited upon with the address of the 25th of March, praying his majesty not to grant any office during life, which was not usually so granted; and that his majesty had been pleased to return the following gracious answer: His majesty acquaints his faithful commons, that he will take the subject of their address into his most serious consideration, and thinks it proper, at the same time, to inform them, that he has thought it fit to provide, that in the grant now to be made of the office of chancellor of the duchy of 1807. his Lancaster, the office shall be conferred only during his royal pleasure. His majesty assures faithful commons, that in the execution of the powers with which he is intrusted by law to grant certain offices for life, as in the exercise of all the prerogatives of his crown, his conduct will at all times be governed by an anxious attention to the public interest." On the following day, April 9, a petition was presented from the London clergy, meeting at Sion College, against the extension of liberty to the Roman Catholics, which was ordered to lie on the table. After some other ordinary busi "I rise, sir, to submit to the house a few observations on a subject of great national importance, and involving in it questions of the most serious constitutional consideration. And in doing so, sir, I cannot help expressing my sincere regret that a duty of such moment had not devolved upon some member more competent to discharge it than the hun ble individual who, in his zeal for the constitution, was heedless of the difficulties which his inferiority must in such an undertaking have to contend against. But, sir, however in adequate I may prove, I have to conjure the house not to attribute the feebleness of the advocate to the weakness of the cause, but rather let it be disposed to conclude that, as a becoming sense of the greatness of the question and of the tribunal fills me with dismay, so should the indulgence of this house contribute to remove it. Sir, I could have wished to have staid those foul calumnies that presumed with equal ignorance and malice to prejudge and to condemn the motives that influenced the conduct of his majesty's late servants, so far as that conduct related to the unfortunate misunderstanding that led to their dismissal; and this, sir, not upon the principle of prefering any one ministry, or of adhering to any one party, but upon the great and unshaken conviction, that the unrestricted propagation of such slanders, how ever gros or false, tends in an alarming degree to vitiate the public mind, and thus to assail political integrity in its very source; for they have but empty notions of our greatness as a people, who do not understand that public virtue is national security. I repeat, therefore, sir, that I wish such slanderers had been staid, at least until the ingenuous, manly, and luminous statement of the noble lord (Howick) had gone abroad, and rendered them contemptible and harmless. Sir, that statement enabled me to form a clear and satisfactory opinion of the conduct of the late ministers, immediately previous to their departure from power; and, as I consider the question upon that part of their conduct as involving great constitutional principles, I have foregone my original intention of going at large into the general merits of their administration, and shall confine myself to a brief consideration of that conduct which has been the subject of so much discus sion, and to the principles by which it appears to have been regulated. I presume then, sir, I shall not be thought to have stated a very hazardous proposition, when I assert, that if the law has taken responsibility from the executive, it has secured the people by attach ing that responsibility to the servants of the crown. Independently then of all constitutional considerations, I would ask, Is it consistent with common sense or common justice to exact a written pledge restrictive of the free exercise of judgment, from those men who are alone to be responsible? Is it rea sonable to expect that men should pledge themselves to act contrary to the dictates of their cwn judg ment, when they only can suffer and be punished for that conduct of which they disapprove? But, sir, when considered in a constitutional point of view, the question is only less absurd, because it is more alarming. If the crown is not responsible, and if the servants of the crown are allowed to pledge themselves to the caecutive, what becomes |