« PreviousContinue »
away, though they all remembered how recently it was the cry of the day that the deliverance of Europe was to be attributed to the councils of the noble earl. That cry was the burthen of every song and every speech in praise of Ministers. The Peace of Paris, it was said, had been the reward of perseverance; nay, the noble earl himself was so convinced of it, that he had the motto "Peace, the Reward of Perseverance," emblazoned in burning letters on the front of his house. But how bad the Peace of Paris been rewarded? Let the noble lord look at the glittering star which shone upon his breast, and he would know at least how he had been rewarded for that peace. With respect to the other rewards which that peace had procured, one of them now appeared to be the escape of that man from the island of Elba, whose presence in France threatened to deluge Europe again with blood; nor, as it appeared, had any adequate instructions been given to prevent his escape. A gallant officer, indeed, was permitted to risk the probability of involving Europe in war, if he chose to act upon his own responsibility; but no positive, no precise instructions were given, though a sort of understanding, it was said, existed with the admiral. There certainly appeared to be an understanding in the admiral, and he wished there had been as much in the noble lords. He would not detain the House any longer, as he could not enter upon a variety of arguments which pressed upon him, without weakening the speech of his noble relative; and he should therefore sit down, in the confident hope that the motion of the noble marquis would be agreed to.
that the army might be transferred to the legitimate dynasty in a state of mind that would secure their services, that the arrangements at Fontainbleau were entered into; and he, for one, certainly never did expect, after the unanimous acts of adherence, and the protestations of fidelity proffered by that army to Louis 18, that they would have violated them so soon ; in fact, he thought better of human na、 ture than to suppose such baseness possible. The noble earl then vindicated the conduct of lord Castlereagh from the imputations of lord Grenville, and contended, that he had not only hastened to Paris with all possible expedition, but that when he arrived he did all in his power to prevent the Treaty from being concluded, and at last modified it as far as it was practicable under existing circumstances. The Treaty itself was concluded under the pressure of difficulties: every moment was precious; and the chiefs of the army could not answer for their troops an hour, unless some such arrangement was determined on.
The Earl of Aberdeen said that he was chiefly anxious to correct some misconceptions which seemed to exist with respect to the condition of Buonaparté, at the time he was at Fontainbleau. From the concurrent testimony of all who were on the spot, and in a condition to form an accurate judgment, it was ascertained that if by any movement of the Allies on the corps of Buonaparté that body should be annihilated, and he himself, perhaps, destroyed also, the French army were so anxious about his fate, that the war would not then have been terminated; on the contrary, it was expected they would have rallied round his marshals and protracted the contest to an indefinite period. It was om that view, and from a desire
Earl Grey said, that it was not his intention, after the length to which the debate had gone, to have offered his sentiments at all, had it not been for some most extraordinary things which had fallen from two noble lords opposite. It was impossible, however, to let those observations pass without some short notice. A noble earl (Liverpool) had told them, that notwithstanding the triumphant march of the Allies into Paris-notwithstanding the glorious successes which had led to that catastrophe-notwithstanding the proud hopes which were justly founded upon those successes-the Allies were compelled, as a matter of necessity, to submit to arrangements which, in their consequences, as they now developed themselves, menaced Europe with new dangers; and those were among the first fruits of that great and glorious success which had crowned the efforts of this country, for the maintenance of its own independence and the safety of the world. And how had that necessity been produced? Why, according to the testimony of the noble earl who spoke last, it existed in the Allies being compelled to treat with a person who at that moment was in situation of such despair, discomfiture, and dejection, at Fontainbleau—so weak, so desperate, that by a movement of the combined troops his army would have been destroyed, and its leader annihilated.
[582 That was the declaration of a person who way in which he discharged the duties of was himself on the spot, and had the a seaman, but also for the manner in which means of knowing what he affirmed; and he fulfilled the more extensive obligations if that was compared with the statement of a man and a citizen-that admiral Halof the noble lord who described the situa- lowell had expressed his determination, if tion of Buonaparté to be so formidable he should find Buonaparté engaged in that he could have protracted the war, it any attempt to land hostilely on the conwould be confessed that some new lights tinental shores, on his own discretion to of policy were breaking upon them with detain him and prevent him from exerespect to that transaction. It appeared cuting his purpose. A most proper dethat the Treaty of Fontainbleau had been termination. But how did it come to the concluded, not from any fear of the re- knowledge of the noble viscount? Was it sistance which Buonaparté was in a con- by accident, or did it proceed from addition to offer, but from the desire of trans-miral Hallowell himself, as the precursor of a request to be instructed on the subject by the Admiralty, or at least to intimate to the Admiralty the expediency of instructing his successor with respect to it? Having, in whatever way, obtained a knowledge of this determination of admiral Hallowell, ought it not to have served as a hint to the Admiralty to give those instructions to his successor, which the resolution adopted by the gallant admiral proved to be absolutely necessary? Such appeared to him to be the breach of duty on the part of his Majesty's ministers on this occasion, that if Parliament and the country expressed a disposition to leave power in such bands, they must not be surprised at any future mischances that might occur. A great danger had existed, against which it had been the duty of ministers to provide. The motion for their lordships' decision was, to call on ministers for the steps they had taken in the discharge of that duty. To that motion their lordships must accede, unless they were absolutely indifferent to the manner in which the affairs of the nation were administered. For his own part, he never gave a vote with more complete satisfaction, and with a more thorough conviction of doing his public duty, than he should feel that night in supporting the motion of his noble friend.
The Earl of Buckinghamshire defended the conduct of the Admiralty on the occasion in question. Did any_man conheceive that the val power of France was sunk to so low an ebb, that it was impossible for her to give those instructions to her navy which the noble earl called on our Government to give to ours? And of which of the two nations was it the greater interest, as well as the greater duty, to prevent the return of Buonaparté to the Continent? The object of the late war had been two-fold; the one to remove Buonaparté from France, the other
ferring to the King of France that army which he commanded, in a good temper; or, to use the words of the noble lord (Castlereagh), who wrote with the same elegance and precision that he spoke, "to pass that army over to the King in a state to be made use of." With regard to the escape of Buonaparté from Elba, he thought there was a great degree of culpable negligence in our Government. The danger of such an escape required no extraordinary foresight to anticipate; and yet, because it was impossible so hermetically to seal that island as to preclude all possibility of escape-because they could not " make assurance double sure,' -because, in fact, every thing could not be done, the noble lord at the head of the Admiralty, and his colleagues, seemed to think, therefore, that they were released from the obligation of making any provisions against such an event. Considering the character of the person who had been placed in the Isle of Elba, considering the means which he possessed, and considering the views which had been imputed to him, was it or was it not to be expected, that he would make a descent on France or Italy? Why, then, had not provision been made against such an event? Why had not the British Admiral on that station been directed, if he met Buonaparté in his corvette, armed, and prepared for hostility, to detain him, and prevent him from executing his purpose? If he could collect any thing from noble viscount (and he confessed that not much of the noble viscount's speech was to him intelligible) it was, that not a word of instruction had been given either to the admiral, or to the subordinate naval officers. All the noble viscount had said was, that admiral Hallowell-a name which it was impossible to pronounce without respect, as that of an individual universally honoured, not merely for the
to prevent his return to it. As a security for the latter, the restoration of the Bourbons was most important. Agreeing with the noble marquis who made the motion, that it was by a narrow chance that Buonaparté fell into the situation, the result of which was the loss of his throne, he thence contended, that the best course which this country could have pursued was to accede (as we had acceded) to the Treaty made with Buonaparté. Their lordships had that night been told that all the blood and treasure which had been expended during the late war, had been wasted in vain. This he absolutely denied. We had accomplished that which was of the utmost importance to Europe. Had the opinions of the noble lords opposite indeed been listened to, the efforts made by this country in Spain would have been omitted, and instead of discussing the merits of such a Treaty as that of Fontainbleau, we should have had very different subjects for consideration, with Buonaparté in possession of the whole continent of Europe.
The Earl of Rosslyn reprobated the neglect of his Majesty's ministers to provide some means against the return to the continent of a person whom they themselves characterised as the greatest enemy of the peace of the world. A small force would have been sufficient for that purpose; for the question had not been argued fairly. It was a very different operation to prevent an individual from crossing over in an open boat, and to prevent the passage of an armed expedition. Nothing could be more futile than the attempt made by the noble earl who had just spoken, to justify the conduct of the British Government, by asserting that that of France was as much or more interested in the subject. Whether the Bourbons had the same means and the same facilities as ourselves, was not the question. Our Government had a distinct duty to perform; they neglected it, and if their lordships refused to call for the papers moved for by his noble friend, they would, in his opinion, abandon their duty.
Their lordships then divided :-Contents, 21; Not-Contents 53: Majority,
HOUSE OF COMMONS. Wednesday, April 12. SCOTCH JURY TRIAL BILL.] Mr. W. Dundas moved the order of the day for
the House resolving into a committee on the Bill for extending the Trial by Jury to civil causes in Scotland.
Sir Samuel Romilly said, he did not rise to oppose the progress of this Bill. He thought, on the contrary, that it was a Bill which would confer the most important benefits on Scotland. He could by no means consider it as a mere experiment, but as an immediate remedy for a great practical evil. From his own experience in appeal causes from Scotland, he knew that the greater part of them turned upon mere matters of fact. The mode of trying these questions now in Scotland was enormously expensive as well as dilatory. A case which in England might be disposed of by a jury five or six weeks after the action was brought, was often pending in Scotland for seven or eight years. There was another great advantage, in the trial by jury, that the countenance, the deportment, and tone of voice of the witness, was a sort of living commentary on the value of his testimony. This was an advantage that trials taken upon written depositions could not have. He certainly valued highly the conscientious scruples of those petitioners, who supposed, that after taking the juror's oath, they could not give up their opinion to their fellow jurors, so as to agree upon a verdict. In this country, however, where the trial by jury had existed for many centuries, a man would be supposed to have a very perverted understanding, if he could imagine that, after having advanced all the arguments he could in support of his impressions, he would be perjured in finally acquiescing with the opinions of the majority, and finding a verdict accordingly. He must also observe that he thought this Bill might be a precedent for important amelioration in a part of the English law. In our Ecclesiastical courts, the proceedings (which also went on written depositions) were enormously expensive and dilatory. He hoped that when the attention of the House was called to the advantages of trial by jury in Scotland, they would also see the propriety of a similar mode of trial in many of the cases before our Ecelesiastical courts.
Mr. W. Dundas fully agreed with the hon. and learned gentleman in his remarks on the great importance of this Bill, and declared that he had no wish to precipitate it through the House; on the contrary, he was desirous of paying every at
tention to the prejudices of the Scotch | nation upon the subject. These prejudices, however, he hoped would in the end be removed, and the beneficial objects of the Bill universally admitted.
The House then went into the committee. To the first five clauses no objection was made. To the sixth clause
Mr. W. Dundas proposed an amendment, the object of which was to provide, that after the death of the commissioners which should be first appointed to preside in the Jury Court (one of whom, for the sake of setting the machine going, it was intended should be English), all the commissioners should be appointed from among Scotch barristers. This arrangement, he thought, would in a great measure remove the jealousy which was at present felt by persons in Scotland to
wards this measure.
Mr. Abercrombie disapproved of this amendment. He paid a high compliment to the talents and fitness of the gentleman whom he understood now to be appointed (Mr. Adam), and considered it as one of the most important parts of the Bill, that there should be some one commissioner at
least, well acquainted with the rules of evidence in this country, upon trials by jury. He thought it too much to tie up the hands of the executive power from appointing any such person, in case of the death of the gentleman now appointed.
Mr. Horner supported the amendment. He thought that a mere English barrister would be no more competent to try causes
according to the law of Scotland, than a barrister who had only practised in Scotland, would be to sit at Guildhall and try cases according to the law of England. He conceived that the law of evidence in Scotland would be improved by the trial by jury; but it must be, after all, by the Scotch law of evidence, and not by the English law, that those trials must be decided. If there was any attempt to transplant at once the English law of evidence into Scotland, he was sure that it would
The Lord Advocate of Scotland cordially approved of the measure, and thought the amendment judiciously introduced.
Mr. Croker also spoke in favour of the amendment, and fully acceded to the propriety of the commissioners in question being confined to the Scotch bar. The amendment was then agreed to, and the clause adopted. Several new clauses were then proposed, among which was
resolution grounded upon them.
The America would be to enforce such de-
MOTION RESPECTING THE NEGOCIATION FOR PEACE WITH AMERICA.] Marquis Wellesley rose, pursuant to notice, to lay before their lordships the grounds of his motion relative to the manner in which the late negociation with America had been conducted. The war with America he had considered as almost one of the most calamitous events that could befall this country; and when that event did unhappily take place, we had at least one consolation, that the aggression which led to it was theirs and not ours; but we had only that one consolation. It was a war in which little glory could be acquired by success, in which success itself must be mixed with feelings which would embitter any glory that could be derived from it, and in which the smallest defeat would be attended with a disgrace infinitely disproportionate to the highest advantages that could be expected from such a contest. Engaged in such a war, what was the plain and clear course and policy to be pursued by the Government of this country? To be ready to seize every opportunity to put an end to it,--not to omit even the smallest occasion of bringing about an amicable discussion to allay that feeling of irritation in which the war had originated. Even supposing the war had been attended with the greatest success on our part, he could not conceive one object which Great Britain could have, except that of putting an end to it. Fatally deluded as ministers had been by the appearance of affairs in Europe, which induced them to change the ground which they had originally taken, and to rest upon a point which had never before been brought into the discussion-for that such was the delusion under which they acted, he was convinced--the question now came to be, what was the course which our ministers ought to have taken? They ought not to have been deluded by the fatal error that their success against one power ought to be turned against another-by the fatal error, that instead of immediately and magnanimously making use of that success as the means of bringing about an amicable adjustment of differences with America, they ought to consider it as a ground of rising in their demands and urging undue pretensions. The only use of the greatest success in the case of