Page images

measure which was decidedly unpopular. | had been used was perfectly correct. He At the same time it appeared rather felt himself justified in saying, that the awkward, that ministers would only agree question was pressed through the House to lay the necessary information on the in an indecent manner. It was, he might subject of the Property-tax before the assert, hurried forward in defiance of the House, in the course of a few days, and sentiments of the people. Could the House yet they would not consent to delay the forget the number of petitions that were farther progress of the Bill at present presented against the renewal of the Propending. Now, he wished to remind perty-tax? Could they avoid thinking of them, that many gentlemen were desirous the immense numbers that would have of a modification of the Tax, and he hoped been presented, if he had not abandoned that ministers would not pertinaciously the Tax? What was there, under these refuse to impart that information, which it circumstances, in the conduct or the lanwas necessary gentlemen should possess, guage of his right hon. friend who made before they could propose a proper modi- the motion, that deserved censure? His fication of the measure. He was astonish-right hon. friend said, "You propose to ed how the Government, almost under any circumstances, could propose this Tax to the country.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer observed, he had no objection to produce such documents, as, without greatly interfering with the progress of the measure, would afford gentlemen a basis for modifying it. For his own part, he wished they would point out a beneficial modification of the Tax.

Sir J. Newport said, if the right hon. gentleman really wished the Tax to be modified, he ought himself to propose some plan of modification, and not leave it to others; he ought to point out specifically what his wishes were. He (sir John) called for accounts, which he conceived vitally necessary to a just consideration of the question; and he hoped even those gentlemen who differed from him in opinion, would see the impropriety of attempting to bear down a member of that House who called for what he considered constitutional information.

Mr. Huskisson objected to the language which had been used in the course of the discussion. He denied that Government had any intention of pressing forward, unnecessarily, the measure which gave rise to this debate: and he equally denied, that any intention existed of bearing down a member of that House, when he was discharging his duty. He could assure the gentlemen opposite, that the bringing forward this measure was as painful to his right hon. friend, as it would be to them to give it their support-if, indeed, it were possible for them to support it. But he would never be deterred from doing his duty, with reference to this Tax, bearing hard, as it certainly must, on his colleagues, because gentlemen were pleased to assert, that it was unpopular.

Mr. H. Martin said, the language which

renew this Property-tax-it will, in its present state, bear hard on particular classes of society-many members wish it to be modified-therefore, that we may proceed fairly and truly in this system of modification, give us an account of the produce of the Property-tax, at different periods, with reference to the various classes whom it affects." Now, the right hon. gentleman was very liberal in his concession. According to him, this account would certainly be producedwhen it was too late! He would give it, when there was no opportunity of debating on it when no resolution, for any efficient purpose, could be founded on it. Was it not reasonable, then, that the precipitancy with which the measure was urged forward, should be reprehended? Was it not just that some remonstrance should be made on the part of those, who, it appeared, were not to be heard until the Bill has passed into a law? This was the true state of the case; and he denied that those who had placed it in its most striking light, had made use of language they were not warranted to hold.

Mr. Huskisson said, he did not complain of the language which had been used; but he did complain of the insinuation, that ministers, in proceeding as they had done, with the renewal of the Property-tax, acted from unworthy motives. It was broadly insinuated, that the measure was pressed forward, because ministers dreaded the effects which might arise from the unpopularity of the Tax, if the consideration of it were protracted. He denied the truth of this insinuation. Ministers, in doing what they had done, looked merely to the execution of their duty.

Sir J. Newport utterly disclaimed having ever imputed any improper motives to ministers.

Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald said, that although | pursuance of his notice, moved, that it the right hon. baronet had disclaimed, on should be a standing order of their lordhis part, the having imputed any improper ships, that appeals from the three several motives to his Majesty's ministers, yet the parts of the United Kingdom should be hon. gentleman near him (Mr. Gordon) taken in regular succession-first one surely could not deny, that he had accused from Scotland, then one from Ireland, and ministers, in an indirect way, of having lastly one from England.-Ordered to be acted with gross indecency in pressing taken into consideration that day se'nthe measure. If, however, this censure night. arose from the refusal of his right hon. friend to agree to the motion for farther information, his right hon. friend, and those who agreed with him in opinion, had this consolation, and it would enable them to support the obloquy cast upon them with philosophy, that, on a very recent occasion-the discussion of the Corn Bill-when delay was requested and was opposed, both by the hon. gentleman and the right hon. baronet, each of them declared, that he was willing to bear any imputation to which his conduct might give rise.

Mr. Gordon said, he certainly did conceive, when information was refused which appeared necessary before members decided on the vote they ought to give, and the measure connected with that information was still pressed forward, that it looked like a determination to hurry the measure through the House, lest the popular voice might arrest it in its progress. With respect to the case alluded to by the right hon. gentleman, it should be observed, that every information had been given on that subject; but here the complaint was, that necessary information was denied. This made the great difference between the two cases.

The Earl of Lauderdale, in order to enable their lordships to form a better judgment of the proposed change of arrangement on this subject, moved for a statement of all the appeals that had been brought before them, distinguishing the Scotch, the Irish, and the English.

The Lord Chancellor suggested limiting the retrospective effect of the motion to two years,

The Earl of Lauderdale agreed to limit it to three years, and for that period the motion was agreed to.

TREATY BETWEEN THE ALLIES SIGNED AT VIENNA.] Earl Stanhope wished to ask the noble lord opposite, two questions, He had scarcely ever felt more concern than since their lordships last meeting, having read in the public prints a paper purporting to be a Treaty signed by the four great Allied Powers at Vienna on the 25th of March. The first question he would ask the noble lord was, whether he would object to produce this Treaty? If so, he thought their lordships should insist on its production. There was a clause in the Treaty which he had heard was not correctly published. He believed it was not; for if such a clause was really in the Treaty, it was not a treaty for making war, but for introducing a system of universal massacre. He meant the clause by which the Allied Powers bound themselves to bring to justice all those individuals who took part with the person who was at present the ruler of France. He wished to ask the noble earl if there really was any such clause in the treaty? If not, he considered it essential to the honour of the country that the negative should be known. The clause was exceptionable, not only in point of justice, humanity, and expediency, but also in point of law. He denied the right of kings, or the representatives of kings, to make such a treaty with such a clause in it. It totally altered the situation of the army and nayy, and all officers employed in both services. When they enrolled APPEAL CAUSES.] Lord Redesdale, in themselves, it was to meet the enemy

The Chancellor of the Exchequer then agreed to withdraw his amendment, provided sir John Newport would allow a certain modification of his original motion. The following motion was then put and carried, "That there be laid before this House, an account or estimate of the gross and net assessment of the Property-tax, for five years, ending the 5th of April 1814, distinguishing the several classes."

Sir John Newport said, that as he could not allow a bill which imposed 14 millions of taxes on the country in a manner generally odious, without a full attendance, at least in one stage, he should give notice that he would on Monday move the call of the House for Thursday next.


Monday, April 24.

[ocr errors]

fairly, and die in the field of honour, but not to be exposed to the fate of being murdered by being hanged in cold blood. He objected to the clause in point of law on another ground. One of the most wise and most humane of our statutes was that of the 11th of Henry 7, by which it was enacted, that it was not only not high treason, but not even criminal to adhere to any king de facto, whether he was king de jure or not. He, therefore, on this ground, denied our right to agree to such a clause. His third objection to the clause on the ground of its being illegal was, that if any commander-in-chief, civil authority, king, or emperor, were to put to death a person for supporting the cause of an existing sovereign, such act would, by the law of England, be deemed murder; and he, therefore, denied the right of the Executive Government to make a treaty comprehending such a clause. Another objection to it was, that it was contrary to the rules of war recognised among civilized nations. And his fifth and last reason against the clause was, that it was illegal, because it was contrary to the law of God. He hoped that the noble earl would consent to produce the Treaty, or at least that, for the honour of the country, he would inform their lordships whether it did or did not contain such a clause as he bad described.

The Earl of Liverpool replied, that he had no difficulty in stating to the noble earl, that a treaty had been signed at Vienna on the 25th of March, by the four great Allied Powers. Nor had he any difficulty in stating, that the copy which had been published in the newspapers was not correct, and on that point particularly to which the noble earl had adverted; there were no words in the real Treaty, such as the noble earl had described, or which would bear a similar interpretation. Their lordships were aware that it was not usual for the Executive Government to lay before Parliament any treaty which had not been ratified. When this Treaty should be ratified, it would be his duty, or that of some of his noble colleagues, to receive his royal highness the Prince Regent's commands to lay it on the table of the House. If, however, the noble earl chose to move for the substance of the Treaty, he would not object to its production.

Earl Stanhope observed, that a motion for a copy of the Treaty had been acceded to in the other House, and he

hoped the noble earl would not be stiffer than his noble colleague. He would, therefore, move for a copy of the Treaty.

The Earl of Liverpool repeated, that a copy of the Treaty could not be laid on the table of the House until its ratification. He begged the noble lord would confine himself to moving for the substance of it, which for his purpose would be precisely the same thing.

Earl Stanhope exclaimed, that he did not care whether it was copy or substance, provided it was correct.

An Address, therefore, to his royal highness the Prince Regent, praying for the substance of the Treaty, was agreed to.


Monday, April 24.

SLAVE TRADE.] The House having re solved itself into a Committee of the whole House to consider of the several Acts relating to the Abolition of the Slave Trade,

Mr. Robinson rose to move certain clauses to provide for the care and maintenance of negroes captured in foreign vessels, between the period of their being carried into any port belonging to this country, and that of the final adjudication of the prizes. A considerable time had sometimes elapsed after they were carried into port, before the vessel was condemned; and the consequences of this delay, and of there having been no regular provision made for the care and maintenance of the negroes, had, in one instance, pressed very severely on the unfortunate victims who were taken in the prize. The governor of the colony where the cause was to be tried, had, much to his credit, taken upon himself to cause certain issues to be made from the funds of the island, and thus saved the lives of some of the captives, but several of them unfortunately died. He then moved two resolutions: viz. 1. "That it is expedient that provision should be made for the care and maintenance of any Negroes condemned in any court of Vice-Admiralty during the period of appeal from the decision of any such Court. 2. That it is expedient that provision should be made for the care and maintenance of Negroes brought in for adjudication to any of his Majesty's possessions between the period of their being so brought in and any adjudication of the Court."

The Resolutions were agreed to, and ordered to be reported to-morrow.

his Majesty the

795] HOUSE OF COMMONS, Substance of the Treaty entered into at Vienna. [796 SUBSTANCE OF THE TREATY ENTERED | Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and INTO AT VIENNA.] Mr. Whitbread, seeing having the noble lord in his place, rose to read taken into consideration the consequences the motion which he proposed to submit which the invasion of France by Napoleon to the House. He then read his intended Buonaparté, and the actual situation of motion, viz. "That an humble Address that kingdom, may produce with respect be presented to his royal highness the to the safety of Europe, have resolved in Prince Regent, that he will be graciously conjunction with his Majesty the, &c. &c. pleased to give directions, that there be &c. to apply to that important circumlaid before this House, the substance of stance, the principles of the Treaty of any treaty or engagement entered into at Chaumont. Vienna on or about the 25th day of March last between the ambassadors of his Majesty and his Majesty's Allies, together with the substance of any note of explanation of any article or articles of the said Treaty or engagement, or of any declaration transmitted by his Majesty's Government to the Court of Vienna explanatory of the views of his Majesty's Government touching such Treaty or engagement, together with the date of the receipt of the said Treaty, and the transmission of the answer thereto on the part of his Majesty's Government, and also of any subsidiary arrangements connected therewith."

"They have consequently resolved to renew, by a solemn Treaty, signed sepa. rately by each of the four Powers with each of the three others, the engagement to preserve, against every attack, the order of things so happily established in Europe, and to determine upon the most effectual means of fulfilling that engagement, as well as of giving it all the extension which the present circumstances so imperiously call for.

"Art. 1. The High Contracting Parties above mentioned, solemnly engage to unite the resources of their respective States for the purpose of maintaining entire the conditions of the Treaty of Peace concluded at Paris the 30th of May, 1814; as also, the stipulations determined upon and signed at the Congress of Vienna, with the view to complete the disposition of that Treaty, to preserve them against all infringement, and particularly against the designs of Napoleon Buonaparte. For this purpose they engage, in the spirit of the Declaration of the 13th March last, to direct in common, and with one accord, should the case require it, all their efforts against him, and against all, those who should already have joined his faction, or shall hereafter join it, in order to force

Lord Castlereagh said, he had no objection to give the substance of the Treaty made at Vienna. He would only protest for himself against the course pursued on this occasion being drawn into a precedent. It was the prerogative of the Crown to withhold such information till it could be communicated in a ratified form, and it was much for the public advantage that generally till that time arrived the substance of the engagements entered into should not be made known. At present, however, as he was extremely anxious to guard against any misrepresentation on this subject, he had no hesitation in agree-him to desist from his projects, and to ing to give the information called for by the hon. gentleman.

Mr. Whitbread, as he understood the noble lord to consent to grant the papers he wished to be laid before the House, supposed he would have no objection to the Address.

The motion was then read and agreed to. The following is a copy of the Paper Jaid before the House in consequence of Mr. Whitbread's motion.

Substance of Treaties between his Britannic Majesty, and the Emperors of Austria and Russia, and the King of Prussia, respectively; signed at Vienna, on the 25th of March, 1815.

"His Majesty the King of the United

render him unable to disturb in future the tranquillity of Europe, and the general peace under the protection of which the rights, the liberty, and independence of nations had been recently placed and secured.

"Art. 2. Although the means destined for the attainment of so great and salutary an object ought not to be subjected to limitation, and although the High Contracting Parties are resolved to devote thereto all those means which, in their respective situations, they are enabled to dispose of, they have, nevertheless, agreed force of 150,000 men complete, including to keep constantly in the field, each, a cavalry, in the proportion of at least onetenth, and a just proportion of artillery,

not reckoning garrisons; and to employ the same actively and conjointly against the common enemy.

"Art. 3. The High Contracting Parties reciprocally engage, not to lay down their arms but by common consent, nor before the object of the war, designated in the 1st Article of the present Treaty, shall have been attained; nor until Buonaparté shall have been rendered absolutely unable to create disturbance, and to renew his attempts for possessing himself of the supreme power in France.

"Art. 4. The present Treaty being principally applicable to the present circumstances, the stipulations of the Treaty of Chaumont, and particularly those contained in the sixteenth Article of the same shall be again in force, as soon as the object actually in view shall have been attained.

"Art. 5. Whatever relates to the command of the Combined Armies, to supplies, &c. shall be regulated by a particular Convention.

"Art. 6. The High Contracting Parties shall be allowed respectively to accredit to the generals commanding their armies, officers, who shall have the liberty of corresponding with their Governments, for the purpose of giving information of military events, and of every thing relating to the operations of the armies.

"Art. 7. The engagements entered into by the present Treaty, having for their object the maintenance of the general peace, the High Contracting Parties agree to invite all the Powers of Europe to accede to the same.

"Art. 8. The present Treaty having no other end in view but to support France, or any other country which may be invaded, against the enterprizes of Buonaparte and his adherents, his Most Christian Majesty shall be specially invited to accede hereunto; and in the event of his Majesty's requiring the forces stipulated in the 2nd Article, to make known what assistance circumstances will allow him to bring forward in furtherance of the object of the present Treaty.


"As circumstances might prevent his Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland from keeping constantly in the field the number of troops specified in the second Article, it is agreed, that his Britannic Majesty shall have the option, either of furnishing his

contingent in men, or of paying at the rate of 30l. sterling per annum for each cavalry soldier, and 20l. per annum for each infantry soldier, that may be wanting to complete the number stipulated in the second Article.


"Foreign Office, April 25th, 1815. "The Treaty of which the substance is above given, has been ordered to be ratified, and it has been notified on the part of the Prince Regent to the High Contracting Parties, that it is his Royal Highness's determination, acting in the name and on the behalf of his Majesty, to direct the said ratifications to be exchanged in due course, against similar acts on the part of the respective Powers, under an explanatory Declaration of the following tenor, as to Article eight of the said Treaty :-


"The undersigned, on the exchange of the ratifications of the Treaty of the 25th of March last, on the part of his Court, is hereby commanded to declare, that the eighth Article of the said Treaty, wherein his Most Christian Majesty is invited to accede, under certain stipulations, is to be understood as binding the Contracting Parties, upon principles of mutual security, to a common effort against the power of Napoleon Buonaparté, in pursuance of the third Article of the said Treaty; but is not to be understood as binding his Britannic Majesty to prosecute the war with a view of imposing upon France any particular government.

"However solicitous the Prince Regent must be to see his Most Christian Majesty restored to the throne, and however anxious he is to contribute, in conjunction with his Allies, to so auspicious an event, he nevertheless deems himself called upon to make this Declaration, on the exchange of the ratifications, as well in consideration of what is due to his Most Christian Majesty's interests in France, as in conformity to the principles upon which the British Government has invariably regulated its conduct."

[The Treaty was received in London on the 5th instant; the answer thereto was dispatched to Vienna on the 8th. Authority and instructions have also been given to the earl of Clancarty to sign a subsidiary engagement consequent upon the said Treaty.]

« PreviousContinue »