We have sacrificed 20,000,000 l. of money to terminate slavery in the

British colonies; and we are now calling upon other nations--upon the

United States, upon Spain, upon the Brazils, and upon various powers

which possess slaves--to imitate and to follow our example; but what

have we done to secure the co-operation of those great countries in the

great object that we have in view? We have offered no inducement to

those nations to imitate our example, by the establishment of order and

good government in our West Indian colonies; for nowhere have we

properly or adequately availed ourselves of those advantages which we

have, or of those advantages which we might procure, to give security to

life and property in those islands, and to maintain peace and

tranquillity among their inhabitants. The communities in the West Indies

are all small societies; and there is not a man in any one of them, not

in Jamaica, even, which is the largest of them, who is not within the

reach of authority. The government of each of those islands is strong in

the means of exercising authority--strong in garrisons, strong in

troops, strong in a police force, and in everything necessary for the

preservation of life and property, for carrying the laws into execution,

and for affording security to every individual, even to the very lowest

of the people;--but yet, I will venture to say, since the enactment of

the law for the emancipation of the slaves, there have been and are no

societies, in the whole world, in such a state of disorganization,

disorder, and anarchy, as are those very West Indian islands of ours;

but which, if they were well managed and governed by the noble lord,

nominally at the head of the colonial department, instead of by the

different factions that resort thither to interfere with the business of

that government, ought, and are calculated, to be of the greatest

advantage to this nation. There are no societies in the world more

capable of being well governed, than those islands are, if the noble

lord opposite would only perform his duty in an independent manner, and

keep all factions at a distance, instead of allowing every faction in

this country to interfere, on all occasions, with the business of the

government in relation to those colonies. But this is not all; let your

lordships look round in all directions, and you will see the same

lamentable state of things existing. Look at Lower Canada, look at Upper

Canada, at Newfoundland--look where you will, you will see nothing but

disorder and anarchy--and resulting from what? from nothing but the

interference of factions in England; who, let your lordships recollect,

have nothing to do with those colonies. These disorders result solely

from the interference of those factions in the affairs of each of those

colonies; and till the government shall put an end to such interference,

and act altogether independently of it, it is impossible to hope for a

restoration of tranquillity.

_August 23, 1839._

* * * * *

_The Melbourne Administration no Government._

I can assure the noble viscount, (Palmerston) that all I desire--and all

I have desired for some years past--is this,--to see a "government" in

the country. To see the country "governed." I wish that I could say

that I had seen it "governed" for some years past; and I hope that the

noble viscount will now turn over a new leaf, and "govern" the country a

little better than he has done heretofore. I may tell the noble

viscount, that I have had some little experience in these matters

myself; and I humbly suggest to the noble viscount, that, before he

announces measures to parliament through the speech from the throne, in

future, he should first take care that those measures have already been

properly considered; and that, before he inserts them in her majesty's

speech, he should have them ready prepared, or in such a state of

preparation as to be able to introduce them to parliament immediately

after the speech from the throne. If he do thus, the measures in all

probability, will be in such a state that they may be passed, or, at all

events, they will not be scrambled for among partisans and factions in

parliament: they will then, most likely, be considered by men who, I

consider, from their official station, must be capable of deciding upon

them; they will be their measures, and not the measures of factions and

parties; or, at least, they will not be measures presented to parliament

in such a state as that they ought not to pass. But I have desired to

see a "government" in the country, for many other reasons besides those

which are referable to the state and manner in which measures have been

brought forward, after having been announced to parliament in the speech

from the throne. I desire to have a "government" in this country,

because I am anxious to see our colonies settled and governed--because

I wish to see the interior of the country settled and governed as it

ought to be governed--and because I wish to see all our establishments

fixed and protected in that form and state in which they are to remain.

_August 23, 1839._

* * * * *

_Causes of the Weakness of the Melbourne Administration._

The noble viscount has been pleased to attribute the disturbances in the

country, at the present moment, to the opposition which, he says, has

been given by your lordships to the measures brought forward for the

redress of grievances. Now I did not like to interrupt the noble

viscount, when he was addressing your lordships; but I certainly felt

much disposed to call upon the noble viscount to name what the measures

were, to which he so alluded. I have been trying, ever since the noble

viscount spoke, to recollect what those measures could be; and I declare

that, with respect to England, particularly, I do not know of a single

measure which has been discussed in this house, and rejected by your

lordships, that would with any degree of propriety, be called a measure

for the redress of the grievances of the people. If there be such

measures, let the noble viscount bring them forward again next session,

and I am sure they will receive from your lordships every attention.

But, my lords, I have taken another view of the cause of the

disturbances which now exist in the country. I think they have arisen

from a very peculiar state of circumstances; and I will venture to

submit them to the noble viscount, in answer to that part of his speech,

in which he was kind enough to attribute those disturbances to the House

of Lords. I believe that they have originated in the unnoticed and

unpunished combinations which have been allowed by the government during

so many years, to exist,--whether as political unions or as trade

unions, or as other combinations,--clearly illegal combinations,--amongst

workmen, to force others to abandon their work, by those who work at

prices different from those at which they are content to be employed, and

at which they have agreed to work for their employers. These combinations

have gone so far in some parts of the country,--and more particularly in

the north of England, and, indeed, throughout almost the whole of the

northern part of the island,--as to threaten destruction to the trade and

credit of the manufacturers; and at last they have arrived at that pitch,

and have spread to that extent, that the country is brought to the

situation in which we see it at the present moment. For, after all,

what are these Chartists, that are found marching about the country,

and engaged in the disturbances that prevail? I have inquired a great

deal into the subject, and the result is, that I believe they are nothing

more nor less than persons combined together for the purpose of driving

other workmen--engaged, whether in manufactures, in the collieries, or

agricultural pursuits, or in other districts--from their work; and for

the purpose of destroying the machinery, and the buildings, and of

interfering with the capital of the employers,--thus striking at the

very root of employment, and at the chief means of the sustenance of the

people,--striking at the foundation of the manufactures and the commerce

of the country, and of all its prosperity. This is my sincere belief; and

all this, I say, is owing to the want of early notice of the proceedings

of those combinations by the government,--to their not having carried the

laws into execution,--to their having left free from punishment those who

have been submitted to trial,--and to their unfortunate selection of

magistrates, and, above all, of the magistrates of the new reformed

corporations of Birmingham, Manchester, Bolton, and other towns. The

government may rely on it, that, until they adopt different measures,

they will not induce parliament to look with favour on their

proceedings. The government first reduced all the military

establishments. Those military establishments are not, even now, nearly

up to their proper footing; and I am firmly convinced that, in the

disturbed districts, there is not one half the establishment equal to

the ordinary establishment maintained in time of peace. This

circumstance, and the want of a due execution of the law upon those who

are tried, convicted, and sentenced to punishment,--and also the fact,

that those who have been appointed to carry into execution the law are

persons connected by habit, by association, and even by excitement, with

those very Chartists who have violated the law,--suggest the true causes

of these disturbances; and not the nameless grievances created by a

nameless opposition in this house, to nameless measures, as alleged by

the noble viscount.

_August 23, 1839._

_Speech on Her Majesty's Marriage._

There is no noble lord in this house who concurs more sincerely than I

do in the expression of congratulation to her majesty upon her

approaching marriage, which she has been pleased to announce a second

time to the public from the throne this day. I sincerely wish, with the

noble mover and seconder of the address, that this event may tend to the

happiness and comfort of the Queen. Upon this occasion I should have

been contented with the address, and should have offered not another

word, if your lordships had not been called upon in the speech from the

throne, to concur with the other house of parliament, in making a

suitable provision for the prince, for whose future station in this

country her majesty's speech has prepared us. But, my lords, it appears

to me that when this house is called upon to express an opinion upon a

detail of this description, the house ought to look into, and act upon,

this subject--it ought not to be a mere congratulation. I conceive that

the public have a right to know something beyond the mere name of the

prince whom her majesty is about to espouse. My lords, I had the honour

of being summoned to attend her majesty in privy council, when her

majesty in council was graciously pleased to declare her intention of

becoming the espoused of this prince. I observed, that the precedent of

the reign of George III. was followed in all respects except one, and

that was the declaration, that this prince was a protestant. [Loud

cries of "Hear, hear!" from the opposition benches.] My lords, I, for

one, entertain no doubt that the prince is a protestant. I believe he is

a protestant. I know he is of a protestant family. I have the honour of

being known to some members of that family, and I am sure that it is a

protestant family. But, my lords, this is a protestant state, and it is

absolutely necessary, by law, that the person who shall become the

spouse of the queen be a protestant; and, if the precedent of George

III. has been taken in part, it ought to have been followed throughout;

and then the public would have had the satisfaction of knowing that the

fact of the prince being a protestant, had been officially declared by

her majesty's government. My lords, I know the noble lords opposite too

well to suppose that they are not aware of the anxiety in the public

mind on this subject; and I know, also, that they had it in their power

to relieve that anxiety, and to gratify the public by making this

declaration; nay, more, my lords, I am convinced that there exists the

same anxiety in the royal mind, about the protestant character of the

state as is felt by me or any of your lordships. And if so, my lords, I

ask, why was the precedent of George III. departed from? Is there any

doubt as to the religious sentiments of this prince? None at all; there

can be no doubt that he is a protestant; he cannot be otherwise. Then,

why is it not so stated? We have heard something of this marriage from

another part of the country; we have seen some proceedings on this

subject since the declaration in council, which show pretty clearly why

the word "protestant" was omitted. My lords, I confess that I am one of

those who read with great attention all that passes in Ireland;--all

those speeches which come from that quarter;--and I do it for this

reason: I have been accustomed to that kind of revolutionary

discussions. It has been said by an eminent French writer, _en plein

jour, on ne conspire pas_; but that is not so now. The object proposed

is terror. These things are declared openly. This I can see from what

appears in the public prints, as I read these public letters and

missives in order to see what the real danger is, and that I may not be

taken by surprise. Now, what I mean to say is this,--that I see in what

has passed elsewhere, a very suspicious reason why the word "protestant"

was not inserted in the communication made to the privy council, and why

it has not been inserted in the speech from the throne. I say to the

noble lords opposite, that I believe they are as much determined as I

am, myself, to maintain the protestant ascendancy of the state. I think,

then, if this be the case, that upon the first occasion, when this

question comes before your lordships, and when the House of Lords shall

be called upon to do any act, or to make any declaration upon the

subject, beyond the mere congratulation of the queen, your lordships

should take that course which may procure the country the satisfaction

of knowing that Prince Albert is a protestant prince, and that this is

still a protestant state.

_January 16, 1840._

_Approbation of the Conduct of the Affghanistan Expedition._

My lords, having been, for a great part of my life, selected to carry

into execution, under superior authority, measures of this description,

no man can be more capable of judging, from experience, of the merits of

government in planning and carrying into operation such measures; and I

should be the last man to doubt, at any time, the expediency of this or

the other house expressing its approbation of the conduct of the

political servants of the crown in planning and working out all

arrangements preparatory to carrying into execution great military

operations. My lords, it has happened to me, by accident, that I had

some knowledge of the arrangements made for the execution of this great

military enterprise; and, I must say, that I have never known an

occasion on which the duty of a government was performed on a larger

scale,--on which a more adequate provision was made for all

contingencies that could occur, and for all the various events which

could, and which did, in fact, occur during this campaign. My lords, it

would be presumptuous in me to say more on this subject, having, I

repeat, been made acquainted, only by accident, with the arrangements

made preparatory to the campaign now brought under your lordships'

attention. With respect to the military services performed, I can say

nothing beyond, nor more deserving the officers and troops, than what

has been stated by the governor-general in his dispatch. My lords, I am

well acquainted with the officers who have directed and performed these

services; and I must say that there are no men in the service who

deserve a higher degree of approbation for the manner in which, on all

occasions, they have discharged their duty; and that, in no instance

that I have ever heard of, have such services been performed in a manner

better calculated to deserve and secure the approbation of your

lordships and of the country.

_February 4, 1840._

* * * * *

_Danger of Socialism._

It appears that this system (Socialism) has spread itself over a great

part of the country; and, upon inquiry, I find that it has taken root

rather extensively in the county in which I reside. I find that in

Hampshire, or on the borders of the two counties, Wiltshire and

Hampshire, there is a large institution for the propagation of Socialist

principles, spreading over no less than five hundred acres of land,

which this society have purchased for their purposes. In reference to

that institution, I have this day presented a petition to your

lordships, containing statements as to the doctrines of this society,

regarding religion, the holy scriptures, God Almighty, and all the great

points of our belief; which statements, in my estimation, demand the

most serious inquiry. When I read that petition, which I did the moment

it was placed in my hands, I felt it to be my duty, as the lord

lieutenant of the county, to call the attention of the magistracy to

the facts which it set forth. That I considered to be my duty; and I

say, also, that the House of Lords, now that the facts have been brought

before them, have a duty to perform to the country, on this question.

These doctrines of Socialism are rapidly gaining strength--are spreading

themselves throughout the country. They have now got beyond that point

at which your lordships might say, "We will take no steps in the matter;

the system is absurd, and will fall to pieces of itself." I say, my

lords, we have got beyond that point; and the people should be made to

understand that the legislature and the government look on those

institutions only with disfavour, and are determined to discountenance

them. And they should also be made to know, that wherever, in the

promulgation of the doctrines of this society, there shall be a breach

of the law committed, it will be treated as such, and punished as such.

I say, then, that it is incumbent on your lordships to take such steps

as will satisfy the country that your attention has been directed to the

subject, with the view to remove the evil and ensure tranquillity. If

the government will allow the motion to pass, and take the subject into

their own hands, and inquire into it, through the magistracy, or by any

other means, I, for one, am willing to leave the matter with them on

that condition, merely adding that I shall be happy to afford them any

assistance in my power in carrying out their inquiry, and in enabling

them to annihilate this mischievous and demoralising system.

_February 4, 1840._

_Compliment to the Navy._

I know a great deal of the gentlemen of that profession; and, for my own

part, I have always had, and still have, the greatest and the highest

respect for them, and the very utmost confidence in them. I have always

endeavoured to emulate their services in the service in which I have

myself been engaged; and I am sure that in nothing have I endeavoured to

emulate them in a greater degree than in that confidence which they

feel, not only in themselves, and in the officers of their own rank, but

in all officers and troops under their command.

_February 6, 1840._

* * * * *

_Eulogium on Lord Seaton._

I had the honour of being connected with the noble and gallant lord in

service at an early period of his life; and I must declare that, at all

times, and under all circumstances, he gave that promise of prudence,

zeal, devotion, and ability, which he has so nobly fulfilled in his

services to his sovereign and his country, during the recent proceedings

in Canada. I entirely agree with the noble viscount in all that he has

said, respecting the conduct of my noble and gallant friend, in

remaining, under all circumstances, at his post, and in taking the

command of the troops, although it was not thought expedient by the

government to place him again in the government of the provinces. I

agree with the noble viscount in wishing that such examples as that

which has been shewn may be always followed in her majesty's service;

for I must say that there never was a brighter example of fortitude and

discretion than that which has been manifested by the noble and gallant

lord.

_March 27, 1840._

* * * * *

_Opinion on the Printed Papers' Question._

I wish--as, indeed, everybody wishes--that the House of Commons should

have the power of printing and publishing its papers. But what I want to

do is this--to provide that, when it proceeds to the sale of them, the

law should take its course. As to the printing and publishing of papers,

I have no objection, until it comes to the point of sale. The sale ought

not, in my opinion, to be made by the authority of the house; it ought

to be made by individuals, and they should be responsible for what they

sell, as they were previously to the passing of the resolution in 1835;

and, up to that time, it must be admitted that the House of Commons and

the House of Lords had the advantage of all their privileges quite as

much as they have had ever since. My lords, I must confess that I look a

little further into this question than the mere matter of libelling

individuals. I consider all this as it affects the public generally;

and, I say, the public is mainly interested in its being understood that

the House of Commons and the House of Lords are not to be the privileged

sellers of libels against individuals.

_April 6, 1840._

_Libels on foreign Sovereigns ought not to be permitted._

I remember reading with great satisfaction, the history of a great case,

which was pleaded and argued at considerable length, some years ago, in

this country--I mean the case of the "King v. Peltier," in the court of

King's Bench. That was the case of an action brought against an obscure

individual, for a libel which he had published upon the sovereign of a

neighbouring country, with whom we were then in a state of peace and

amity. Now, I ask your lordships whether, supposing, in the course of

the late Polish revolution, the libels, some of which we have seen

printed in this country, and others which we have heard spoken of in the

other, and, I believe, in this house of parliament, reviling, in the

strongest terms, the sovereign of Russia, had been stated in the

petitions, or in the proceedings of the House of Commons, and had been

printed, published, and sold by its authority; I ask your lordships

whether such a proceeding would not have been calculated to disturb the

peace of this country, and of the world at large? In short, I ask your

lordships whether it is desirable that there should be an opportunity of

publishing and selling, on the part of the two houses of parliament,

libels against the sovereigns of all the foreign powers in Europe? My

lords, I am one of those who consider that the greatest political

interest of this country is, to remain at peace and amity with all the

nations of the world. I am for avoiding even the cause of war, and of

giving offence to any one, and of seeking a quarrel, either by abuse, or

by that description of language which is found in these libels. I am

against insulting the feelings of any sovereign, at whom individuals may

have taken offence, and against whom they may seek to publish libels

under the sanction of parliament. Let them state what they please in

their private capacity, and let them be answerable for it individually,

as Peltier was. What I want is, that parliament should not, by the

combined privilege of publication and sale, run the risk of involving

the country in the consequences of a discussion of such subjects, and in

all the mischiefs and inconveniences which might arise from it.

_April 6, 1840._

* * * * *

_Reasons why the Chinese stopped the Opium Trade._

It is perfectly true, as is stated by the noble earl, that the trade in

opium has been carried on contrary to the laws of China. But then, my

lords, it has been so carried on with the knowledge of the local

authorities on the spot, who received large payments, in the shape of

bribes, or in the way of duties, possibly both, for allowing the import

of this opium,--its admission into the ports of China. It appears that,

although the trade was forbidden by the law of China, it was known to

the authorities of China, to the emperor himself, and to all the

servants of the government, that it had existed for many years, and that

the discussion had continued for many months, upon the question,

whether the trade should be allowed, and continued, under a duty, or

whether it should be discontinued altogether. Allow me to ask the noble

earl, who has contended so very strongly for the Emperor of China,

whether that morality was so very great while he allowed that trade to

be continued? and whether his morality can be improved in any respect by

opium being introduced upon the payment of a large duty, instead of its

being introduced by means of smuggling, and under bribes paid to the

officers of his government; and even, as it has been shown, from the

exterior waters into the interior of the country, in the Mandarin boats,

that is, in boats, either in the service of the country, or, at all

events, under the charge of officers of the government? I really cannot

see the force of the noble earl's argument with respect to the

illegality of the trade, when it is as clear as possible that its

existence was well known to the government of China, and that no step

had ever been taken to put it down; but, on the contrary, the means of

continuing it, and of raising a larger duty upon it, were under

consideration; and, in fact, the trade was finally put down, and

discontinued only because it was supposed that it occasioned the export

of a larger quantity of native or Sycee silver.

_May 12, 1840._

* * * * *

_The Opium not the cause of the war with China. Defence of Captain

Elliot._

The noble earl says that this war is to be attributed to the opium!

Why? there was no British opium in China at the very time these other

outrages were committed, and when this very language was held; and, as

far as I am able to judge, there was then no opium in the possession of

the British merchants there. An order had been issued to deliver it up,

and this gentleman had gone down the river for the purpose of

surrendering the whole. The war, then, has grown out of another state of

circumstances. First of all, there was a claim for the surrender of an

Englishman to be put to death, because a Chinese had lost his life in an

affray. Captain Elliot, as became an English officer, instituted an

inquiry to discover whether a certain number of persons, stated to have

been in an affray, had been guilty of the murder or not, and the result

of the inquiry was, that he could not bring the charge home to any one;

that he had no reason to suspect any one. The Chinese government still

insisted that these six men should be given up. Captain Elliot refused,

and that, I take it, is one of the causes of the war.

Another of the causes of the war is this--that a provision had been made

that matters should be restored to their former state, in proportion as

the opium should be delivered up; that the British inhabitants should

have the use of the native servants; that they should have the common

comforts of life, provisions, and all that was necessary for

subsistence; and, finally, that the trade should be re-opened, and

matters allowed to resume their usual course. After having given that

promise, it is discovered that this Chinese lost his life in an affray

in which American seamen were engaged as well as the English; and then a

fourth proposition was advanced, which was this, that every master of a

vessel, proceeding up the Canton river, should sign a bond, submitting

himself, and all on board his ship, to be dealt with according to the

laws of China. The noble lord has found fault with Captain Elliot upon

this, as well as upon another matter. Now, this objection is most

extraordinary, and it rather tends to prove that the noble earl, though

he has paid great attention to this particular blue book, is not very

well acquainted with former transactions in that country, or he would

have found that former traders with China had invariably refused to

subscribe to such proposals, and that they had broken off the trade with

the Chinese, rather than do it; rather than give up British subjects to

be dealt with according to the laws of China. I think they acted most

properly; and that Captain Elliot, very much to his credit, refused to

do it; at the same time, he did no more than his duty. He did what

others would I trust have done under the same circumstances; and he is

entitled to great praise for his firmness in resisting that demand. Then

there is another circumstance in which Captain Elliot acted as became

him. I allude particularly to his refusal to give up Mr. Dent. It was

declared that the opium trade was not to be continued; that it was an

illegal trade; and that dealing in opium should not be suffered. It was

supposed that Mr. Dent had been a person very much concerned in that

trade, and had made a large fortune, as I believe many others have

done, by that illicit trade. And Captain Elliot was blamed, when it was

sought to have Mr. Dent given up, because he, her majesty's

representative and the chief superintendent of trade in that country,

stepped forward and said, "I won't allow this gentleman to be given over

to the Chinese government, and to be tried as the Chinese government may

direct." I should, my lords, be ashamed of the name of Englishman, if

there could be found one in her majesty's service capable of acting

otherwise than this gentleman did, under such circumstances. The noble

earl has stated that a great deal of difficulty would have been got rid

of, if Captain Elliot had complied with the request of the Chinese; and

that the Americans gave up a seaman to be dealt with according to the

Chinese laws. I am sorry for it. I must say, it was not their duty to do

so. They would have done better to have taken a leaf out of our book,

and to have followed the example of the East India Company, to put an

end to the trade rather than risk the life of one of her majesty's

subjects, or give him up to be tried by the Chinese government.

_May 12, 1840._

* * * * *

If we cannot sustain our power in the Canadas, we must necessarily lose

all our dominions in North America.

_June 30, 1840._

* * * * *

Colonial responsible government, and the sovereignty of Great Britain,

are completely incompatible.

_June 30, 1840._

_Importance of Colonies to the Mother Country._

I have observed in this country, for some length of time, a growing

desire to get rid of our North American dominions--a desire that they

should become republics. This desire prevails amongst a very large party

in this country. I am aware that there are also others--not, however,

acting from the same motive--who desire that the separation should take

place; tranquilly, if possible, but that at all events it should take

place. In my opinion, these gentlemen are mistaken. It is my decided

opinion, that, considering the resources and the power of these

colonies, this country would sustain a heavy loss, indeed, if these

colonies were to be separated from it.

_June 30, 1840._

* * * * *

_Religious Education must be provided out of the Funds of the Church._

It appears to me that there is no difference of opinion amongst us on

these points--namely, that means must be found of preaching the word of

God to the people of England; and I go further--for this point is also

not disputed--and I say that those means must proceed, in the first

instance, from the church, and that they must be exhausted before the

public is called on for other means; in providing those means, you will

not only be performing a duty incumbent upon you, but you will also be

following the example of every other nation in the world. It has been

my lot to live among idolaters--among persons of all creeds, and of all

religions; but I never knew yet of a single instance in which public

means were not provided sufficient to teach the people the religion of

their country. They might be false religions; I know but of one true

one; but yet means were never wanting to teach those false religions;

and I hope that we shall not have done with this subject until we have

found sufficient means for teaching the people of England their duty to

their Maker, and their duty to one another, founded on their duty to

that Maker.

_July 30, 1840._

* * * * *

_Necessity of administering Oaths._

I entreat your lordships to pause, and recollect that the foundation of

all justice is truth; and that the mode of discovering truth has always

been to administer an oath, in order that the witness may give his

deposition under a high sanction. I hope your lordships will not adopt

another of those bills which have been before your lordships only a few

days, and which suggest, in truth, nothing more than a way of enabling a

witness, who thinks proper to say he has conscientious scruples, to

escape the solemnity of an oath. I admit that the inconvenience of the

present state of the law falls on the community rather than on the

individuals; but, at the same time, I think that, by every one of those

relaxations, we shake the foundations of justice.

_August 4, 1840._

_Church-rate Martyrs--true state of the Case._

In my opinion, this case is a very simple one, and one on which there

can be no doubt as to the course which should be taken. Here is a man

who has been sued for a sum of money, which, it is understood, was

lawfully due by him. The law renders him liable to pay that sum of

money, and the law supports the proceedings against him for the recovery

of it. This person could have easily avoided these proceedings, by

simply paying the sum of 5s. 6d., which was demanded of him; or he could

have gone into court and had the question fairly tried, whether he was

lawfully bound to pay it or not, according to the laws of the country in

which he resides; for, of course, he must be bound by the laws of his

country, as well as all other British subjects. But he has not chosen to

take either course. He has said, "I will not pay that money;" and, in

consequence of his own conduct, a large amount has been incurred in the

way of costs. These costs are not matters of speculation or amusement,

they are realities; they are sums of money paid for the labour of

certain individuals, for certain services performed in the execution of

their duties, under the legal authority of the ecclesiastical courts,

and in this suit. Now, those costs must be paid. Were we to let the man

off from paying the 5s. 6d. for the rate, that remission would not get

rid of his liability for the costs; these latter must be paid, either by

himself or his friends, or else they must be paid by the other party,

by the lawful suitors, by the lawful plaintiffs, who had a right

originally to recover the money. They are the persons who would have to

pay the costs, unless your lordships consent to insert the clause

proposed by my noble friend. Somebody must pay the costs after all. But

it is said that the defendant is not to pay the costs, and that he is to

be let out of prison. Well, you may let him out, if you please; but,

surely, you would not call upon the plaintiffs to pay the costs incurred

by _his_ conduct? That would not be justice. That would not be fair

between man and man. Not a soul in this house could be of that opinion.

It is not consistent either with law or justice to throw these expenses

upon those on whom the law of the country has laid the necessity of

incurring them. Not they, but he who, by his own conduct, rendered the

proceedings imperative, ought to be made to pay the costs.

_August 7, 1840._

* * * * *

_The Duke of Wellington not a War Minister._

No noble lord nor any other man that I know has done half so much for

the preservation of peace, and above all, for the pacification and the

maintenance of the honour of France and for the settlement of all

questions in which the interests of France were involved, as the

individual who is addressing your lordships. From the period of the year

1814, down to the last month of my remaining in the service of the king,

I did everything in my power for the strengthening and preservation of

the peace of Europe, and more particularly for the maintaining and

keeping up the best understanding between England and France. I repeat,

that I have done more than any one else to place France in the situation

in which she ought to be in the councils of Europe, from a firm

conviction,--which I feel now as strongly as I ever did,--that if France

is not, then there is no necessity for the preservation of the peace of

Europe, or for a sound decision on any subject of general policy. I am

sure that the noble viscount would find, if he would take the trouble to

search the archives of the government, papers written by me shortly

before I went out of office in 1830, that would fully justify the

assertion which I have just made. I am sure that those who were in

office with me were as anxious for the preservation of the peace of

Europe as any politicians, be they liberals or otherwise. They were as

anxious for the preservation of a good understanding between France and

this country, and that France should be on a perfectly good

understanding with all the powers of Europe, and that she should take

the station which becomes her in the rank of nations, and which her

power, her wealth, and her resources entitle her to.

_January 26, 1841._

* * * * *

_The Capture of Acre, the greatest deed of modern times._

I have had a little experience in services of this nature, and I think

it my duty to warn your lordships on this occasion, that you must not

always expect that ships, however well commanded, or however gallant

their seamen may be, are capable of commonly engaging successfully with

stone walls. I have no recollection, in all my experience, except the

recent instance on the coast of Syria, of any fort being taken by the

ships, excepting two or three years ago, when the fort of St. Jean

d'Alloa was captured by the French fleet. That is, I think, the single

instance that I recollect; though I believe that something of the sort

occurred at the siege of Havannah, in 1763. The present achievement I

consider one of the greatest deeds of modern times. That is my opinion,

and I give the highest credit to those who performed such a service. It

was altogether a most skillful proceeding. I was greatly surprised at

the small number of men that were lost on board the fleet; and, on

inquiring how it happened, I discovered that it was because the vessels

were moored within one-third of the ordinary distance. The guns of the

fortress were intended to strike objects at a greater distance, and the

consequence was, that the shot went over the ships that were anchored at

one-third of the usual distance. By that means they sustained not more

than one-tenth of the loss which they would otherwise have experienced.

Not less than 500 pieces of ordnance were directed against the walls;

and the precision with which the fire was kept up, the position of the

vessels, and lastly the blowing up of the large magazine, all aided in

achieving this great victory in so short a time. I thought it right to

say this much, because I wished to warn your lordships against your

supposing such deeds as this could be effected every day. I repeat, that

this is a singular instance, in the achievement of which great skill was

undoubtedly manifested, but which is also connected with peculiar

circumstances which you could not hope always to occur. It must not,

therefore, be expected as a matter of course, that all such attempts in

future must necessarily succeed.

_February 4, 1841._

* * * * *

_A blow at the Reformation._

There is no doubt that that body (the Roman Catholic seminary of St.

Sulpice) was made a corporation by means of that ordinance, yet until

that property had been legally vested in them by the ordinance, they had

no legal right whatever to it. * * * I was very much struck, I must

confess, when first I read the petition and the ordinance relating to

this subject; I was very much struck by the total departure it evinced

from the principle of the reformation; a principle untouched up to this

present moment. And I entreat your lordships, whatever you may think on

the subject of this ordinance or other questions--I entreat the

attention of your lordships and of the British public to this, that this

ordinance was the first blow openly struck by authority at the

principles of the reformation; principles hitherto upheld, particularly

throughout Canada, from the period of the conquest down to the present

moment. I felt strongly on this point the moment I saw the petition and

the ordinance, and I still continue to feel strongly on the subject,

since I have heard the right reverend prelate state that it was the

governor-general, not a member of the legislative council, but the

governor-general of the province who brought forward this measure,

acting on the part of the queen, whose rights, interests, and

prerogative it was his duty to protect, and which he should have

protected in the legislative council.

_March 5, 1841._

* * * * *

_Australia._

It would be much the best plan to put an end to all the Australian

commissioners, to whom allusion is made in the bill before your

lordships, altogether. A worse system was never adopted for the

management of a colony. We ought to place that colony in the same

position as the other colonies under the government of her majesty, and

rule it in the usual way by the Colonial Office. I disapprove of these

commissions altogether.

_April 30, 1841._

* * * * *

_Evils of Reduced Establishments._

It was stated that the British were expelled from Canton on the 5th of

May. I, however, infer from what took place, that the British were

obliged to retire at the end of March. Looking to the events of the

present year, they appear to me to be exceedingly unsatisfactory. And to

what, I would ask, is this owing? It appears to me that this state of

things is to be attributed to improper advice. The interests of the

country in various parts of the world, have not been properly protected.

If there is not a general war, we are placed in a situation that tends

to it; and this arises from our having reduced our establishments far

below what they ought to be, even in a time of peace. This was the true

cause of the present state of things in China, and of delay and

consequent misfortune elsewhere; and I much fear that circumstances will

occur to cause still further regret at the course that has been adopted

with respect to our establishments. I told ministers so at the time they

were making those reductions in 1837. I stated to them then that they

were not taking such care of our establishments as would enable them, in

the event of war, to contend with success against our enemies. The

reduction of our establishments has been pursued in different parts of

the world, where we are engaged at present, and now we see the

consequence.

_April 29, 1841._

* * * * *

_Poor Law Commissioners must be made to do their duty._

I voted for the Irish poor law bill, and proposed amendments, which, I

believe, induced your lordships to pass the bill. I am sure that those

amendments had the effect of inducing others to approve of that bill,

who would not have done so if those amendments had not been introduced.

I did all this on the faith and assurance, not only of the house and

the government, but of those gentlemen themselves, that it would be

carried into execution in Ireland, with the same strictness and fairness

as it was in this country. In this expectation I have been altogether

disappointed, and for this reason I am determined, when I get the other

papers, to read every line of them, and probe the matter to the bottom,

in order to see where the mischief lies. But recollect there is not only

this case, but several other cases before your lordships, in every one

of which there is corruption. We cannot stop here with the resolutions

of my noble friend. The Clonmel case is a very gross case. The noble

lord opposite has told us that the office can be but of little

importance, as the salary is only 10l. to 30l. a-year; but see what

power the office gives. In this very case let your lordships see what

happened next day, when the brother-in-law of this individual was

appointed valuator, a situation which puts the property of every man, in

some degree, in his power. We must go deeper into this question, if we

wish to do justice to Ireland, and to the gentlemen who hold property in

that country. We must take care that their property shall not be left at

the disposal of such miscreants, and we must make the poor law

commissioners do their duty. I cannot think of asking him any question

on the subject, for it was sufficient for him to know that he was the

nephew of a person called the archbishop, to be satisfied of his

fitness.

* * * * *

It would be mere stuff to stop here; the persons on whom the house must

call are the poor law commissioners themselves. Let them be taught to

feel it their duty to keep a correct record of their proceedings, which

they shall be ready to produce at any time that the house or the

government may call for them. Let them be taught to feel that the house

will not permit such conduct as this, and we shall soon see an end to

such abuses as those out of which the resolution of my noble friend

arises.

_May 3, 1841._

* * * * *

_Why Corn Laws were imposed._

These laws (corn laws) were not invented, nor have they been maintained,

for the purpose of keeping high rents in the pockets of noble lords, but

they were invented and have been supported for the purpose of

maintaining and supporting agriculture, and of maintaining this country

independent of all other countries and parts of the world; and it is

also perfectly true, as stated by my noble friend behind me, that such

has been the policy of England for centuries, sometimes by one mode, and

sometimes by another; sometimes by imposing protective duties when corn

rose above certain prices, and sometimes by giving bounties, and

occasionally very large bounties, on the exportation of corn. But

whatever has been the means, the object has always been to support the

agriculture of the country, in order to render this country, in respect

of its subsistence, independent of other nations. This was the object of

the improved system introduced in the year 1828; this was the object of

those principles which have been maintained ever since; at least it was

the principle on which I gave those laws my support, and on which I more

than once asked your lordships to render this country dependent only on

itself for subsistence. This was the object of the corn laws, and not

that dirty object which has been imputed to your lordships--and which, I

must say, it is too bad to impute to your lordships--of obtaining large

rents from your land. It is also perfectly true, as has been stated by

my noble friend behind me, that there is not a country of Europe in

which corn laws do not at this moment exist; but, nevertheless, I

suppose if it were proposed to repeal these laws, and adopt the measures

recommended by the petitioners, your lordships would be told of the

quantities of corn that might be had from Russia and from Prussia, and

other parts of the world. But are there no corn laws in those countries?

Has the noble earl heard of no laws prohibiting all exportation of corn

to other countries? That fact alters the whole state of the question of

corn laws in this country. The effect of such a state of things would be

most serious if there came a bad season here and there, too. Then,

again, has the noble lord not heard of the high duties imposed on the

exportation of corn from those countries during the late wars? Have not

your lordships got evidence before some of the committees--have you not

got letters from some merchants at Dantzic to one of those governments

on the subject of the prices of corn in England, and on the rate of

duties imposed at that port? and was it not stated that the increased

price obtained from England might be expected to enable those merchants

to pay the duties imposed by their government on exportation? Let it be

observed, that I do not blame the sovereign to whom I allude for

imposing those duties--I should not have blamed him if it had been an

act of war, whereas it was a mere measure of finance. I do not say, that

I agree with him in his notions of protection; but I say, that when I

consider it a question of protection, that sovereign is not to be

blamed, and that his object was like that of your lordships, to secure

the subsistence of his subjects, and not to cause a rise of rents.

_May 7, 1841._

* * * * *

_The Corn Laws._

The first man who brought forward those opinions (Adam Smith) which I

have read as well as noble lords opposite, made an exception upon this

very subject. He excepted corn from the doctrines he laid down as to all

the other articles of trade. In relation to the subsistence of the

people he says, that we must always take care to ensure that subsistence

within the country itself--and accordingly he excepts corn from the

several doctrines which he lays down. I confess I have heard nothing

during these discussions to alter my opinion, that the corn laws which

were adopted almost unanimously in 1828, have perfectly answered the

purposes for which they were intended, and have kept the prices as

steady as the nature of the commodity will allow. Yes, my lords, in this

country, when we have produced corn for our own subsistence, and it is

our object invariably to produce it, prices have been more steady than

in any other country of Europe. It it my opinion, on all these grounds,

that these laws have operated as successfully as any laws could have

done.

_May 11,1841._

* * * * *

_Agriculture and Manufactures._

I cordially concur in the feeling that the prosperity of the

agriculturist must depend on the general prosperity of the manufacturer,

and of commercial interests in general. There can be no doubt about

that, and then corn laws are supported, not with a view to the advantage

of any particular interest or class of men, but with a view to render

the whole country independent of foreign countries in respect of its

supply of food. I believe that all parts of the country, and every

individual resident in it, are interested in this subject.

_May 17, 1841._

* * * * *

_Cotton and Corn._

Allusion has been made to the increase in imports in cotton. It has been

said but small profits were made upon the manufacture of this immense

quantity of produce, but that appears to me to have no connection with

the question of the corn laws. The fact is, the improvements in the

machinery, and the introduction of steam, have enabled the manufacturers

to manufacture with very little cost. They do not make the profit now

they did fifty years ago; but they still make profits, although

diminished by competition--not by competition with the foreigner, but by

competition at home. Other manufacturers who were aware that profits

were to be made, although not so large as formerly, entered the field,

built new manufactories, established machinery, and thus introduced

fresh competition.

_May 25, 1841._

* * * * *

_Grounds of Complaint against the Whigs in_ 1841.

These grounds are neglect and mismanagement of the finances of this

country by her majesty's government, the future consequence of which, as

has been stated, it is impossible to foresee, and the improper,

impolitic and unconstitutional means which they took to recover

themselves. These things were proved by reference to the actual state of

the finances, when it was found necessary to review them in the last

parliament; and it was shewn that, in point of fact, after a period of

about five years, a debt had not alone been accumulated of five

millions, but there had also been a vast deficiency in the public

revenue. This debt and deficiency are to be attributed to the practice

adopted by her majesty's government of carrying on extensive operations,

of which nobody approves, mind you, more than I do when done as they

should be, and at the same time not making due provision for the

increased expenditure, occasioned by their carrying on war in several

places with a peace establishment, being the most crying of these evils,

and neglecting to employ the proper means for meeting the increased

charge, and putting an end to the impending danger. The next allegation

against them, my lords, is for not making financial provision in the way

of ways and means for the expense and charge incurred by the country

from the exertions made to put an end to the danger which menaced it. A

noble lord has stated that, though a large amount of army and ordnance

was kept on foot after 1831, no provision had been made for the

additional expenditure in the usual way of an application to parliament,

but that irregular and unconstitutional modes were adopted by her

majesty's government for finding means of defraying those expenses. In

this, my lords, my noble friend spoke but the simple truth. In one case

the whole charge of a war had been thrown on the East India Company, and

then converted into a debt on this country; in another the funds of the

savings' banks had been tampered with; in another the Exchequer bills

had been funded; and, in short, several most irregular modes has been

adopted. Then, my lords, what happened? Besides these expenses; besides

the failure of the government to make due provision by the mode of ways

and means to defray the charges incurred by their naval and military

operations; besides these, my lords, her majesty's government thought

proper to repeal a large amount of taxes, by which means they reduced

the revenue of the country to such a degree as materially and inevitably

left a most serious deficiency.

_August 24, 1841._

* * * * *

_Hasty adoption of Free Trade by the Whigs._

My lords, it is not more than fourteen months ago since I heard the

noble viscount (Melbourne) say,--making use of the strongest language I

ever heard in opposition to a motion merely for taking the corn laws

into consideration,--the noble viscount on that occasion declared before

God, with reference to the abolition of the corn laws, that he believed

the man must be mad who dreamed of such a thing. Now, my lords, I do not

pretend to say that the noble viscount has not a perfect right to change

his opinions. I believe he thought that he had good grounds for doing

so, and I think I have myself read the report which induced him to

change them. But this I do say, that, before your lordships and the

country were placed in this situation in regard to the queen, the noble

viscount was bound to give parliament and the country an opportunity of

obtaining that knowledge and information as to the true merits of the

question, which he imagines himself to have obtained.

* * * * *

It is by such inquiries as these, my lords, calmly and patiently

conducted, that men are enabled to judge respecting the consequences of

great changes of this nature, and of the bearings and tendencies of each

particular part of what is intended to be done. But, instead of such a

course being pursued, what has been done in the present instance?

Nothing. * * I further think, that the committee and report were _ex

parte_ ones, upon which no legislative measures ought to have been

founded. But what I chiefly complain of is this, that before the noble

viscount put this speech into the mouth of her majesty, he did not give

us full and fair information to guide us as to what we ought to do. I

believe, my lords, that conduct like this is sufficient to induce you to

say that the noble lords opposite do not deserve your confidence.

_August 24, 1841._

* * * * *

_Lord Melbourne's services to the Queen._

I am willing to admit that the noble viscount has rendered the greatest

possible service to her majesty. I happen to know that it is her

majesty's opinion that the noble viscount has rendered her majesty the

greatest possible service, in making her acquainted with the mode and

policy of the government of this country, initiating her into the laws

and spirit of the constitution, independently of the performance of his

duty, as the servant of her majesty's crown; teaching her, in short, to

preside over the destinies of this great country.

_August 24, 1841._

* * * * *

_England the best country for the Poor._

With respect to the corn law question, my opinions are already well

known. I shall not argue the propriety of these laws, but I shall be

ready to discuss them when a discussion is brought forward by a

government having the confidence of her majesty's parliament. But, my

lords, I earnestly recommend you, for the sake of the people of this

country, for the sake of the humblest orders of the people, not to lend

yourselves to the destruction of our native cultivation. Its

encouragement is of the utmost and deepest importance to all classes. My

lords, I have passed my life in foreign countries, in different regions

of the earth, and I have been in only one country in which the poor man,

if sober, prudent, and industrious, is quite certain of acquiring a

competence. That country is this. We have instances every day; we have

seen, only within the last week, proofs that persons in the lowest ranks

can acquire, not only competence, but immense riches. I have never heard

of such a thing in any other country. I earnestly beg of you not to lose

sight of this fact, and not to consent to any measure which would injure

the cultivation of our own soil. I have seen in other lands the misery

consequent on the destruction of cultivation, and never was misery equal

to it; and, my lords, I once more conjure you not to consent to any

measure tending to injure the home cultivation of this country.

_August 24, 1841._

* * * * *

_Opinions on Abstract Questions of Policy inexpedient._

My lords, the noble viscount states, and he states truly, that it is not

a habit in this house to call on your lordships to give an opinion on

abstract questions of policy. That, my lords, is perfectly true, and I

have myself endeavoured to bring the house to that view on more than one

occasion, that is, to prevent the expression of any opinion on abstract

questions of policy, in the shape of an address or otherwise, until it

should be brought before your lordships in the shape of a distinct

legislative measure. More than once I have succeeded in persuading your

lordships to withhold such opinion, and on some occasions, even, I have

supported the government (whig) against them, however much I may have

disapproved of their policy with regard to them.

_August 24, 1841._

* * * * *

It is at all times desirable that the sovereign should not be pledged in

the speech from the throne.

_August 24, 1841._

* * * * *

_Abolition of Oaths._

The foundation of all justice is truth, and the question is, how truth

is to be ascertained. Before I can receive any application of this

description, and before I can vote for the bill lately laid on your

lordships' table, I would like to hear the opinion of some of those

learned men who are at this moment engaged in the administration of the

law, and who must have made up their minds as to the best means of

ascertaining the truth. Hitherto it has been understood in this country

that the best means was by administering oaths. I am aware that the

legislature has made certain exceptions. It may be very well to make

these exceptions--and let further exceptions be made if they are

expedient--but I do say, that we ought to have some solemn examination

of the question, and some certainty that the new mode proposed is as

good as the old one for ascertaining the truth, which, as is said, is

the foundation of all justice.

_March 18, 1842._

* * * * *

_The Income Tax only justified by Necessity._

I can answer for myself, and I believe I can also answer for my

colleagues, that nothing but necessity could have induced us to propose

such a tax. We are perfectly aware of all the inconveniences that must

result from it. We are perfectly aware of the provisions of the act of

parliament upon your lordships' table. We are perfectly aware of the

odious powers with which these commissioners and others must be

trusted--and we can reconcile it to ourselves only by the necessity of

the case. Your lordships must feel it. We have been now for several

years engaged in operations involving great expense in all parts of the

world. I will not say, my lords, that we have been at war, but, I

believe, we have been at something as like war, if it be not war, as

anything could well be. We are exactly in the situation of persons who

have incurred a great debt, and who are called upon to pay the bill. I

say again, my lords, that nothing but a strong sense of the necessity of

the case, and that there was no other course which we could take to

produce such a revenue as would enable us to meet the difficulties of

the country, or to do what is necessary for its prosperity, would have

induced us to propose such a measure; and it will not last one moment

longer than it shall be absolutely necessary.

_June 17, 1842._

* * * * *

_The Poor Law has worked well._

I was one of those who supported the poor law as it was introduced some

years ago by my noble and learned friend, and I did so on ascertaining

the inconveniences and evils which attended the system of working under

the old poor law up to that period; and being sensible that the only

remedy which could be found for those evils and inconveniences, was in

the measure proposed by my noble and learned friend. My lords, I have

since had the satisfaction of contemplating the working of the measure,

which then became the law of the land, and I must say that I have been

satisfied with its results. It has, undoubtedly, improved the condition

of the working classes, and it certainly does place on a better footing

the relations between the working classes and their employers. It has

enabled those who had the care of them to provide better for the aged

and destitute than has been hitherto the case; and it has, in general,

given satisfaction throughout the country. My lords, I don't mean to say

that I approve of every act that has been done in carrying this bill

into operation. I think that, in many cases, those who had charge of the

working of the bill have gone too far, and that there was no occasion

whatever for constructing buildings, such as have acquired throughout

the country the denomination of bastiles, and that it would have been

perfectly easy to have established very efficient workhouses without

shutting out all view of what was passing exterior to the walls. I say,

then, that in some respects, the system has been carried farther than it

ought to have been, and, I shall also say that its features have assumed

a harsher character in some parts of the country than was necessary; but

this has been owing, I must admit, in a great degree, to the adoption of

another law by parliament, I mean what is called the dissenters'

marriage act, the regulations depending on which were connected with the

execution of the poor law act, and rendered necessary the establishment

of unions in many parts of the country which were not yet ripe for the

formation of those unions. But, notwithstanding the circumstances to

which I have just now alluded, I must, in general, state my approbation

of the working of this act. I have paid great attention to the subject.

Wherever I have resided, I have attended the meetings of guardians of

unions in my neighbourhood; I have visited several workhouses in

different parts of England, and I must say that I never visited one in

which the management was not as good as could be expected in such

districts of the country, and which did not give universal satisfaction.

_July 26, 1842._

* * * * *

The government of Lord Melbourne carried on war all over the world with

a peace establishment. That is exactly what we (Sir Robert Peel's

government) do not.

_February 2, 1843._

* * * * *

_Real cause of the Chinese War_.

I was almost the only individual who stated that the real ground of

complaint against the Chinese government was its conduct towards the

person employed in the service of her majesty, and representing her

majesty in China. I was the only person in this house who defended her

majesty's servants. I said that the war was a just and necessary war. I

will go further, and say, if it had been otherwise--if it had been a war

solely on account of the robbery of the opium--if her majesty's

government were engaged in that war, and if their interests and honour

were involved in it, I should have considered it my duty to make every

effort for carrying it on with success, and have asked parliament for

the assistance which would have enabled her majesty's servants to bring

it to an early and successful termination.

* * * * *

_Eulogium on the Indian Army_.

My lords, I know something of that (Indian) army; I have served in its

ranks, and I know pretty well what its feelings are; and though there

are different castes and religions composing it, the discipline of that

army, and the military spirit by which it is actuated, totally do away

with all such distinctions. You will never hear in India of any

difference of caste or religion in that army, any more than you would in

the ranks of the British army. All do their duty,--all are animated by

the true feelings of soldiers.

_March 9, 1843._

* * * * *

_Evils of the Press in India._

The state of things in that country is one of much greater difficulty

now than when I was there, because there is now established in India

what is called a free press, but which I should make free to call a most

licentious press; and by referring to these papers your lordships will

see that the mischievous influence of that press is repeatedly

complained of. For my own part, I must own, I do not see how the

operations of war can be carried on in a satisfactory manner in India,

with such a press constantly exercising its influence, and connected

through its correspondents with every cantonment of the army.

_March 9, 1843._

* * * * *

_The Union must be maintained inviolate._

There can be no doubt of the intention of her majesty's government to

maintain the union inviolate; and it is the duty of every government,

and I will say it is the determination of her majesty's present

government, to maintain that union inviolate, and to come down to

parliament and call upon parliament to give her majesty's government its

support in carrying into execution any measures which may he considered

necessary to maintain the union inviolate, and to preserve from

turbulence the peace of her majesty's dominions.

_May 9, 1843._

* * * * *

_The House of Lords should disregard popular Clamour._

As to the remarks which are made on your lordships elsewhere, I am one

of those animadverted upon, and I am glad to find myself upon this

occasion in such extremely good company. For myself, I can only say that

I have been for a great number of years in the habit of treating such

criticisms and such assaults with the smallest possible attention; and I

shall continue to do my duty to the best of my ability, in the service

of my sovereign, or elsewhere, and continue to treat the language

referred to with as little attention as heretofore; and I recommend

noble lords on both sides of the house to follow my example in this

respect.

_May 15, 1843._

* * * * *

_Sees of St. Asaph and Bangor._

There can have been no object in the measure (the bill for the union of

the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor), but to make all the arrangements in

the manner most convenient to the country generally. There could have

been no desire to injure the dioceses of St. Asaph and Bangor, or any

other district in the kingdom; but the object was to make a better

distribution of the revenues of the church, and to satisfy the public of

a sincere desire to effect such a reformation as would be a real one,

and such as would give satisfaction, not only to those who were attached

to the church, as my noble friend and myself, but also to others who

looked upon it with indifference.

_May 23, 1843._

* * * * *

_The Duke of Sussex._

My lords, his late royal highness was well known to all your lordships.

His royal highness frequently took part in the discussion of those

subjects which came under your lordships' consideration; and although it

was impossible for every person endowed with such acquirements, and

possessed of such an understanding, as belonged to his late royal

highness, not to have felt strongly on the various events and questions

which from time to time were brought under the consideration of this

house, yet his late royal highness always treated those subjects,

however exciting they might have been, with much moderation, and with

great forbearance towards others with whom he might have a difference of

opinion. I must do his late royal highness the justice to say, that

though I had the unhappiness to differ from him in opinion on several

subjects which came under discussion in this house, yet, notwithstanding

that difference of opinion, his late royal highness ever treated me with

unvarying kindness, and with the utmost condescension. My lords, his

late royal highness having received the benefit of an excellent

education, and having in his youth passed a considerable portion of his

time in foreign countries, was a most accomplished man; and he continued

his studies, in all branches of literature and science, until almost the

latest period of his existence. His late royal highness was, during his

whole life, the protector of literature, of the sciences, and of the

arts, and of the professors and representives of all branches of

knowledge. For a number of years his late royal highness was elected

president of the Royal Society, and he received the learned members of

that body in his house with the greatest amenity and kindness. Having

himself sedulously cultivated all subjects of literature, science, and

art, his late royal highness was, I may say, the patron, protector, and

friend, of all those who pursued such studies, on every occasion when

that protection was necessary. But other praise belongs to his late

royal highness. His royal highness was not backward--on the contrary, he

was equally forward with all the princes of his family--as a patron and

upholder, as a supporter and protector, of the various charitable

institutions of this metropolis; and, my lords, up to the last moment of

his life, he was the friend of the indigent and the unfortunate wherever

they might be found.

_April 27, 1843._

* * * * *

_Reasons for the Dismissal of the Irish Magistrates._

These gentlemen having been some of the persons to instigate and

encourage the assembly of those large meetings in Ireland, on which the

first law authority had pronounced in writing the opinion that they had

a "tendency to outrage;" that "they were not in the spirit of the

constitution, and may become dangerous to the State;" the

lord-lieutenant of the government could not put any confidence in the

performance of their duties by these magistrates and deputy-lieutenants,

who had thus excited these meetings, or who presided at them. Your

lordships are perfectly aware that on one occasion it was proved that

these meetings had a tendency to outrage--indeed, outrage was actually

committed. I told your lordships on a former occasion that there was a

great difference in Ireland on the subject of the repeal of the union.

Now, suppose that two assemblies representing such opinions assemble on

the same occasion and in the same neighbourhood, why it is obvious that

outrage and bloodshed may occur, and it must be likewise obvious that

those magistrates and deputy-lieutenants are not officers on whom the

Lord-lieutenant can rely for carrying into execution measures for the

repression and suppression of outrage which he may think proper to take

on such an occasion. My lords I have besides to observe to your lordships,

that for a very considerable period of time it has been a matter of

notoriety in Ireland that the members of her Majesty's council, her

majesty's servants in this and the other house of arliament, declared it

to be the fixed and positive determination of the government to maintain

inviolate the legislative union between the two countries. Some of the

most distinguished members of both houses of parliament declared, in their

places, that they had the same intention; and this declaration of opinion

has been communicated to the public more than once; and in no one instance,

as I believe, has there been an intention avowed to promote the object of

this repeal of the union. Well, then, what must be inferred from the

notoriety of that fact? What but that the repeal of the union, so far as

a vote of parliament is concerned, is hopeless? It is to be carried then

by intimidation, by force, and violence; and, of course, as the government,

whose duty it is to resist and repress such acts of intimidation, force,

and violence, whenever they should be attempted, by all the means at their

disposal, cannot use such instruments as those who excite the people to

appear at their head, the lord-lieutenant and lord chancellor have taken

measures to remove them from the commission of the peace, and

deputy-lieutenancies of their several counties. This is the principle,

my lords, on which I conceive the government has acted.

_June 9, 1843._

* * * * *

After what passed in both houses of parliament it became a matter of

notoriety that the opinion of parliament was, that the legislative union

should not be repealed, and that every effort on the part of the

government should be made to resist the attempt to occasion that repeal.

Then, my lords, under these circumstances, the lord chancellor finds

Lord French and other magistrates calling meetings to repeal the union,

assisting at the meetings, presiding at them, and urging all the

proceedings. At this time the opinion of parliament was notorious, yet

meetings consisting of 10,000, 20,000, 100,000, no matter as to the

number of thousands, continued. My lords, I wish to know with what

object they were continued? Was it with a view to address parliament to

repeal the union? No, my lords, they were continued to obtain the

desired repeal of the union,--by terror, if possible,--if not, by force

and violence. And the persons calling these meetings, I beg your

lordships to observe, were the magistrates, the very men who must have

been employed by government to take measures to resist this violence, to

prevent breaches of the peace, to arrest those who should be guilty of

such breaches, and to bring them to justice; and then the noble lord

says, that the government ought not to have removed those magistrates

from their situations, and that they ought not to draw a distinction as

to the time when it became notorious to the whole world what were the

views entertained by parliament and the government on this important

question. My lords, in this and the other house of parliament, no one

would have any idea of repealing the union except in regular course,

like another act of parliament; but with these meetings of 50,000 and

60,000 men, was there any question of discussion? No, my lords, the

question was terror, force, and violence. That was the ground on which

the lord chancellor told these magistrates after the views of the

government had become notorious, you must be dismissed if you attend, or

excite others to attend, such meetings. I am as much concerned that this

state of affairs should exist as the noble lord can be; but of this I am

quite certain, that the way to be prepared is not to have in the service

of the government--not to have government dependant upon the exertions

of--a number of magistrates who have excited and encouraged these

proceedings, assisting at and presiding over these very meetings. That

could not have been desirable, and I say that the lord chancellor and

situation as that of governor-general of India, an officer who was so

for little more than two years--an officer who has given satisfaction in

so high a situation to those by whom he was intrusted and

employed--whose acts have been concurred in and sanctioned in every

instance; to recall that officer suddenly, making no provision for the

performance of the great duties which are to be performed, and which

must he performed in that country--to recall an officer in whom the

government fully confided, without the concurrence of that

government--is, my lords, an act, to say the least of it, that cannot be

called a discreet exercise of the power which is conferred on those who

have so used it. My lords, I will say nothing--- I will advert to

nothing that is not notorious--that is not strictly in reference to the

act of parliament. I beg your lordships to observe, that the body which

did this act--which I must call an act of indiscretion, at least--that

body, as a body, has no knowledge whatever of the instructions sent out

to the governor-general, and under which he acted. They stated reasons

for withdrawing the governor-general from India; but, as a body (except

the secret committee appointed under the act of parliament), they had no

knowledge whatever of the instructions under which the governor-general

acted, or of the events which had taken place in that country, except

that which is within the general knowledge of this and the other house

of parliament, and the whole public of this country. And yet, my lords,

they take this responsibility upon themselves--having no knowledge of

the instructions which it was deemed at Waterloo. Very possibly not, my

lords. Bear in mind what he said in respect to the augmentation of his

numbers, and the means of assembling those persons. He said on one

occasion, that by the post of one night, he could collect the whole of

this force in different parts of the country; and it is perfectly

true,--I have not a doubt of the fact.

_July 14, 1843._

* * * * *

_Remedial Measures of no avail whilst Agitation continues in Ireland._

My lords, I must say, that grieved as I am that there should be so much

truth in the representations made by the noble lord of the existing

state of the country, and of its prospects, threatened as they are by

the continuance of agitation, I must say, that no measure that could be

proposed, no new measure which could be adopted, would have the smallest

effect in removing any of these evils or inconveniences. My lords, the

only mode, the only course to be adopted on the part of the government,

is to oppose a strong resistance to everything like a breach of the

peace or public order, and to be prepared, as I hope they are prepared,

to enforce measures for preserving quiet, and protecting property, in

Ireland. My lords, I know of no remedy but that for the state of affairs

which exists at present; particularly as it appears that whether the

peace of the country shall be disturbed or not, depends on the will of

one man, and his influence over the wills and actions of some thousands,

who possess influence in various parishes of the country.

_July 14, 1843._

* * * * *

_Agitation no Relief for the Poverty of Ireland._

My lords, it certainly is true that there is in Ireland a vast number of

poor. I have been sorry to see that it is stated in some returns on the

table, that there are as many as 2,000,000 of poor in Ireland. My lords,

it happens unfortunately, that in all parts of the empire there are

poor; but I will beg to observe, that it is not in the power of this

government, nor of any government, nor of any parliament, in the course

of a few weeks, or a few months, or, I may say, a few years, to relieve

the poverty of a great country like that, extending as it does to such a

portion of the population. But, my lords, I beg to know whether poverty

can be relieved by this description of agitation for the repeal of the

union? Is poverty relieved by marches of twenty-five and thirty Irish

miles a-day, during the period of spring and summer, to hear seditious

speeches? Is poverty relieved by subscriptions of thousands of pounds to

the repeal rent, and the O'Connell rent, and other funds of that

description? No, my lords, that poverty must be relieved by a

perseverance in industry and sobriety; not taken up by fits and starts

for the sake of a more orderly appearance at seditious meetings, where

the people are marshalled by bands of music and flying colours. The

evils, whence that poverty proceeds, are not to be cured in a day. The

remedies must be some time in operation; and all I can say is, that the

government are sincerely desirous to avail themselves of every

opportunity that may tend to benefit the people of Ireland, and to

relieve that poverty of which the noble lord so eloquently complains.

_July 14, 1843._

* * * * *

_Assistance of Foreigners to the Repeal Agitation.--Their Anti-English

Motives._

My lords, I do not dispute the extent of the conspiracy--I do not

dispute the dangers resulting from organization in Ireland--I have

stated it publicly on more than one occasion--I do not deny it--it is

notorious, it is avowed, it is published in every paper all over the

world. I do not deny the assistance received from foreigners, not from

foreign governments,--I have no right to say so,--but from foreigners of

nearly all nations; for there are disturbed and disturbing spirits

everywhere, who are anxious to have an opportunity of injuring and

deteriorating the great prosperity of this country.

_August 8, 1843._

* * * * *

_The Military in readiness to preserve the Peace in Ireland._

I, whose duty it is to superintend one of those offices on which the

execution of the measures of the government depends, feel confident that

everything that can be done has been done, in order to enable the

government to preserve the peace of the country, and to meet all

misfortunes and consequences which may result from the violence of the

passions of those men who unfortunately guide the multitude in Ireland.

_August 8, 1843._

* * * * *

_Mr. O'Connell's Proceedings._

To plunder the public in Ireland of money for the purpose of O'Connell

rent, or repeal contribution, or the lord lieutenant would not have done

their duty if they had not removed those persons from her majesty's

service.

_July 14, 1845._

* * * * *

_The "Monster" Meetings in Ireland._

The noble lord (the Marquis of Clanricarde) has stated that these

meetings were not illegal. I certainly do not consider myself competent

to decide whether they were or were not illegal. This I know, that they

consist of very large numbers--whether of 10,000 or 100,000 I am sure I

cannot tell, and I do not believe any man can tell to a certainty. They

are assembled in very large numbers, regularly organised, marching under

the lead of persons on horseback, with bands and banners, in regular

military array. After having attended these meetings, those present are

dispersed by word of command, without trouble, violence, or breach of

the peace, and march back, perhaps twenty or thirty miles. * * * My

lords, I have had some experience, in the course of a long life, which I

have passed in the service of the sovereigns of this country, of

revolutions. A distinguished author has written of the French

revolution. "_On ne conspire pas sur la place_." There is no secret in

these transactions, and the reason why there is no secret is this, that

the great means of operation are deception of their followers, and

terror in respect of their adversaries. Accordingly, we hear a learned

gentleman exclaiming to his audience, "Napoleon had not in Russia such

an army as this is; the Duke of Wellington had not such a one repeal of

those laws upon which the reformation in this country has been founded.

My lords, I have already taken opportunities of warning your lordships

against the assertion of such doctrines in this house, and I must again

express a hope that you will observe and beware how they are introduced

into it, because you may rely upon it, that there is not an individual

in this country, be his religious opinions what they may, be his

position what it may, who is not interested in the maintenance of the

reformation. Not only our whole system of religion, but our whole system

of religious toleration, in which so many people in this country are

interested, depends upon the laws upon which the reformation was

founded; and I therefore entreat your lordships to give no encouragement

to doctrines that might induce a belief that there exists in this house

any indifference upon the subject of those laws.

_March 18, 1844._

* * * * *

_The Compact entered into for the Maintenance of the Protestant Church

in Ireland should be held sacred._

The Protestant church in Ireland has existed in that country for a

period of nearly three hundred years, and was maintained in that country

during a century of contests, rebellions, and massacres; and during a

contest for the possession of the crown, the Protestants of that country

encountered that contest, and kept possession of their church; and

during another century it was maintained through much opposition, and

under difficulties of all descriptions. At the period of the union, the

parliament--who had the power to consent to the union, or to refuse

their consent--stipulated that the Protestant church in Ireland should

be maintained, and maintained on the same footing as the Protestant

church of England in this country. The parliament had, under the

auspices of the king of this country, the power of either making or not

making that compact. Your lordships entered into that compact with the

parliament of Ireland, and I entreat you never to lose sight of the

fact. I entreat you not to suffer yourselves to be prevailed upon to

make any alteration in, or to depart in the slightest degree from, the

terms of that compact, so long as you intend to maintain the union

between this country and Ireland. It is the foundation upon which the

union rests,--it is a compact which you have entered into with the

parliament of Ireland, and from which you cannot depart without being

guilty of a breach of faith, worse than those which have been referred

to in other countries,--worse than those pecuniary breaches of faith

which have been alluded to in the course of the discussion which took

place in your lordships' house this evening upon another subject. I

entreat you to listen to none of those petitions or speeches which tend

to the injury or the destruction of the church in Ireland. Do what may

be necessary,--do what it may be proper to do, in order to render that

church more beneficial to the people of that country; but I entreat you

to adhere strictly, in spirit and according to the letter, to the

compact you have made, and not permit it to be supposed in any quarter

whatever that you entertain the most distant intention of departing, in

the slightest degree, from that arrangement.

_March 18, 1844._

* * * * *

_The recall of the Governor-General of India, by the Court of Directors,

an act of gross indiscretion._

My lords, I conceive that this right (of recalling the governor-general

of India) is one which the court of directors are bound to exercise with

due discretion; as all bodies and all individuals ought to do, when they

possess extraordinary powers under the provisions of the law. In such

cases, my lords, they are hound to exercise that power with the utmost

discretion. Now, my lords, I will venture to submit to your lordships,

as the opinion of an individual who has had some experience in these

matters, that the exercise of the power belonging to the court of

directors is not, in this instance, to say the least of it, a discreet

exercise of that power. My lords, the court of directors has this power.

It has also the power of nominating a successor in the room of the

person recalled. But, my lords, it has no other power whatever, as your

lordships will find in looking into the law on the subject--it has no

other power whatever, my lords, except under the direction and control

of the board of commissioners for the affairs of India, and for the acts

of that board of commissioners her majesty's government is responsible.

Under these circumstances, my lords, I venture again to say, what I

before said, that it is not a discreet act of authority to recall from

power--to recall from such an important what not, is one thing; to

excite the common people of the country to approach as near as possible

to the commission of crime, and to do all the mischief that is possible

to be done to the country, without exposing one's own person, is another

thing; but to corrupt the army is quite a different thing, which, I hope

and trust, I may promise your lordships will not be fulfilled.

_August 11, 1843._

* * * * *

_Eulogium on Major-General Sir Charles Napier._

My lords, I must say, that, after giving the fullest consideration to

these operations (in Scinde), I have never known an instance of an

officer who has shown in a higher degree that he possesses all the

qualities and qualifications to enable him to conduct great operations.

He has maintained the utmost discretion and prudence in the formation of

his plans, the utmost activity in all the preparations to ensure his

success, and, finally, the utmost zeal, gallantry, and science, in

carrying them into execution.

_February 12, 1844._

* * * * *

_Persons of every Religious Denomination interested in the maintenance

of the Reformation._

The noble lord (Earl Fitzwilliam) has propounded to your lordships a

something, neither the nature of which, nor the period at which it is to

be carried into execution, is he himself exactly certain of. Something

or other must be done; to that something this country must make up its

mind; the noble lord does not state what it is to be; but it is, at all

events, to involve the necessary to send out to that part of the

globe--and the act of parliament will shew they are bound to have

none--having no share in giving those instructions--in short, having no

knowledge on which to found a judgment on so important a subject as the

recall of a governor-general, they took upon themselves to pronounce

their judgment on the conduct of this officer, and to disapprove of it.

Now, my lords, I must say, that having no knowledge which could enable

them fairly to pronounce their judgment on his conduct, or that could

justify them in depriving the government and the country of the best

instrument--I say it again, the best instrument to carry on and perform

the various duties of that great office, making no provision whatever

for the performance of those duties which are now to be provided for by

her majesty's government, is an indiscreet exercise of the powers they

possess. My lords, as I have said so much on this subject, I will, in

order to illustrate the indiscretion of this act (that is the best word

I can find for it), go yet a little further. My lords, though I believe

this is the first time in the history of the government of India that

this extreme measure has been resorted to by the court of directors, it

has more than once been in contemplation; but upon the advice and

remonstrance of the ministers of the day, the resolution of the court of

directors has been always withdrawn. And it is the fact, that it has

been in contemplation by these very gentlemen, with reference to this

same governor general, in the course of the last twelve months; but

they were at that time prevailed upon to withdraw that resolution, and

not to persist in the recall of my noble friend. This was previous to

the late great military operations in Gwalior, of which we have all

heard with so much satisfaction,--operations which I am sure your

lordships will have perceived from the perusal of the reports which have

been laid upon your table, must have been founded upon the most just and

discriminate measures, for the equipment and maintenance of the armies

placed in the field, under the direction and superintendence of the

governor general--not the equipment only of these armies--but the

support of the troops in the field, the maintenance of military

communication, and the moans of advance and retreat--in short, all that

could tend to insure their success--were amply provided for. Then, my

lords, suppose the case to have occurred of the court of directors

thinking proper to recall the noble lord six or eight months ago, whilst

the measures to which I have just alluded were in contemplation, what

would have become of the great operations at Gwalior--operations carried

on under the superintendence and direction of my noble friend the

governor general. Why, the gentleman who was senior in the council must

have succeeded my noble friend--a respectable man no doubt he is, but

without the experience of my noble friend; and without the knowledge of

the manner of equipping armies, and making proper arrangements for their

being called into action, it is needless to add, that such great and

successful operations as those to which I have alluded could not be

carried on, and I leave your lordships to judge what the situation of

India would have been if that expedition had failed, and if such an army

as the one which we have seen described in one of the blue books upon

this table had continued in existence, threatened, as we were, at the

same moment, by a similar body in the Punjaub, on the north-west

frontier, and with the province of Scinde still in an unsettled state.

Why, my lords, the danger would have been imminent, and this would have

been the consequence of the recall of my noble friend six or eight

months ago, a measure which was in contemplation, and was only prevented

by our representations to those who have now committed this gross

indiscretion of recalling the noble lord--it was prevented only by the

representations made to those gentlemen of the danger which would ensue

to the public interest from the measures which they were about to adopt,

the dangers resulting from the impossibility that they would be able to

provide for events which most probably would occur if they recalled

their officer without the consent of her majesty's government, who would

thus be deprived of the instrument in their hands best fitted for

carrying their instructions into execution, while the directors, in this

country, must be unable to direct the means in existence for securing

the safety of their troops, for guarding their frontier, for upholding

the honour of Her majesty's arms, and the security of our vast dominions

in that part of the world. I say again, as I have said before, and I

say the least of it, when I pronounce it to be the most indiscreet

exercise of power that I have known carried into execution by any body

possessed of power since I have had a knowledge of public affairs, which

I am sorry to say is upwards of half a century.

_April 29, 1844._

* * * * *

_His Support of the New Poor Law (Ireland.)_

I will take the liberty of reminding your lordships that the New Poor

Law was originated by noble lords opposite, while they were in the

service of her majesty, and that I gave the measure my support from a

sense of duty, because I thought it was calculated to benefit Ireland. I

have throughout supported the measure; I proposed some amendments which

I thought likely to promote its beneficial action; I have given it my

support ever since; and I am prepared to do all in my power to ensure

its successful operation.

_May 17, 1844._