Page images
PDF
EPUB

Let the right honourable gentleman recollect, the path of recantation was not a new one to him; he had trod that path more than once. (Mr. Pitt said, across the house, in what, or when?) Mr. Sheridan answered, last year; when the coal-tax was given up; when the price at which the navy bills were to be paid off by the subscribers was altered; the right honourable gentleman having at the same time declared, that he gave up that to clamour which he had before obstinately refused to reason and justice. He had conceded, in that instance, and upon a wretched plea; he might also be said to have retracted in regard to his India bill; for there certainly could not be a bill more unlike the one he had opened, than the right honourable gentleman's East India bill of the last year was, when it passed. Having said this, Mr. Sheridan once more pressed the Chancellor of the Exchequer to accompany him in leading the house out of its error; let them all tread back the mistaken road they had taken; and if the right honourable gentleman would put out his power as a minister, and lend them the strength of his arguments as a man, he said, he would answer for it, they would honestly meet him, and be sure to carry their point.

The motion was negatived by a majority of 39; and the following amendment, proposed by Lord Mulgrave, carried, "That the Speaker do acquaint the high bailiff, first, that he is not precluded by the resolution of this house, communicated to him on the 8th of June last, from making a return whenever he shall be satisfied in his own judgment that he can so do. And, secondly, that this house is not satisfied that the scrutiny has been proceeded in as expeditiously as it might have been. That, it is his duty to adopt and enforce such just and reasonable regulations, as shall appear to him most likely to prevent unnecessary delay in future; that he is not precluded from so doing by want of consent in either party; and that he may be assured of the support of this house in the discharge of his duty."

FEBRUARY 17.

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.

Mr. Pitt moved for leave to bring in a bill, for better examining and auditing the public accounts of the kingdom.

MR. SHERIDAN rose to state to the right honourable gentleman that he was mistaken in a particular fact. The book he had alluded to was not an authentic voucher, prepared at the instance of the treasury; but the private memorandum book of an individual.

Mr. Sheridan reminded Mr. Pitt of what had

at the time passed in debate on the subject of that book, and of the amendment that had been moved, changing the words of the original motion in two places; in one, the words, "It appears to this house," were changed to "This house having reason to believe ;" and in the other, the words, " amounting in the whole to forty-seven millions," were changed to "large sums of money."

Mr. Pitt admitted Mr. Sheridan was correct, and that he, Mr. Pitt, had erred in what he before said.

FEBRUARY 18.

WESTMINSTER SCRUTINY.

Colonel Fitzpatrick acquainted the house, that he had in his hand a petition from the electors of Westminster, praying to be heard by counsel at the bar, in defence of their just rights and privileges, and to state new facts which they were not apprised of at the time of presenting their former petition. He stated the variety of difficulties and disadvantages they laboured under; and that they conceived one great reason of the scrutiny being continued, was owing to the evidence which was adduced at the bar some days since, being incompetent and defective. He desired the house to call to its recollection, that particular stress was laid, in a former debate, on Mr. Fox being shy of going into the parishes of St. Margaret and St. John. Since that debate, a fact had come out, which very much engaged the attention of the public, and which he conceived would surprise the house, when he came to relate, that the high bailiff, the next day of meeting, after he had received his new orders, in the presence of some hundreds of electors; and before several members of parliament, openly declared, and authorised them to state, "that an offer was made by the counsel for Mr. Fox, whilst in the parish of St. Anne, to go next into the parishes of St. Margaret and St. John; which proposition was refused by the counsel of Sir Cecil Wray.” Therefore, whenever evidence of that fact was produced at their bar, he trusted they would put an end to so destructive a measure as the scrutiny, which was carrying on contrary to law or justice. In order to show that he had not stated the petition falsely, he begged leave to read it, which he did as follows :

[ocr errors]

"TO THE HONOURABLE THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. "The humble petition of the persons, whose names are subscribed, in behalf of themselves, and several thousand electors.

“That your petitioners, understanding that a motion had been made in this honourable house, relative to the election for Westminster, and that the high bailiff of this city, and his two assessors, had been ordered to attend, abstained from desiring this honourable house to permit them to offer any evidence relative to the scrutiny carried on for Westminster, or to be heard by their counsel in support of their rights.

"That your petitioners have now reason to believe, that the evidence given at the bar of this honourable house, was defective and incompetent; and that farther

material evidence may be laid before this honourable house, touching the said scrutiny.

"Your petitioners, therefore, humbly pray this honourable house, that they may be permitted to produce such evidence, and to be heard by their counsel at the bar of this honourable house."

MR. SHERIDAN stated the propriety of the petition, and that the evidence meant to be adduced could not be given before. The petition was couched in decent terms, and therefore, he presumed, might be heard; for he trusted no person would lay down the doctrine, that the proceeding of parliament was not liable to be arraigned.

The motion was agreed to.

FEBRUARY 21.

WESTMINSTER SCRUTINY.

The order of the day for hearing counsel on behalf of the electors of Westminster in support of their petition was moved and read. Colonel Fitzpatrick then moved" That the counsel be now called in," but before the question could be put on this motion, Lord Frederick Campbell moved an amendment, adding "that the counsel be restrained from going into any matters but such as tend to prove the evidence offered at the bar of this house on the 9th defective and incomplete; or such other matters as may have been discovered since the order of the same date."

MR. SHERIDAN was of opinion, that the noble lord's amendment would lead the house into a greater inconsistency than that from which he would be thought desirous to guard it; for the house having received, and caused to be read, a petition from some electors of Westminster, and ordered that they should have leave to be heard by their counsel in support of the same, the noble lord wanted to persuade gentlemen to make the house in the present, reject what in the former it had adopted and ordered. This would be an inconsistency the more inexcusable, as there was not so much as a single argument advanced that could give a colour to such a proceeding. This petition, on which the electors wished to be heard, had no necessary connection with any other; and therefore it was a most curious circumstance, that, for fear any thing should be said about another petition, with which the present was unconnected, the counsel were to be restrained from speaking in support of the allegations of their clients, who had already received the leave of the house to plead their cause by proxy; but if their proxy was to be restrained

from pleading in support of the petition, for what purpose could leave have been given? The petition was far from being disrespectful; for though the electors complained that they were deprived of their representations, they said they had paid their share of the taxes that had been imposed by a parliament in which they were not represented. In order to throw ridicule upon the amendment, he moved an amendment upon it, so that the amended amendment would run thus: " and that they be restrained from going into any matter not contained in the said petition, in support of which the petitioners had prayed, and obtained leave of the house to he heard by their counsel."

Mr. Sheridan afterwards defended his amendment, and contended that the prayer of the petition was not absolutely to order the high bailiff to make a return, but to take measures by which that object might be attained. If the house were so tenacious of consistencies, and that the high bailiff stood so much upon his oath, the house need only take away his discretion; they might withdraw that authority under which he conceived himself to act, and accept his return. This would sufficiently remove all the objections on the score of the high bailiff's conscience.

After this question was put, on Lord F. Campbell's amendment, ayes 203; noes 145. Mr. Erskine and Mr. Pigott being then called to the bar, the former addressed himself to the speaker.

Sir,

“As my learned friend and I cannot submit to the restraint which the house, in its wisdom, has been pleased to impose upon us, without departing from the positive instructions of the electors of Westminster, whose rights, under the law, we were engaged and prepared as lawyers, to assert and support, we must beg leave to withdraw ourselves from the bar."

They accordingly retired. The high bailiff was then called to the bar; and after an examination and further debate, it was decided by a majority of nine to continue the scrutiny.

MARCH 4.

OFFICE REFORM BILL.

Upon the question "That this bill be engrossed,"

MR. SHERIDAN rose and said, he had no objection to the motion, not to let the bill go to the third reading, when he flattered himself he should be able-certainly not to conceive the right honourable gentleman, but-to show him that the present bill

was absolutely and entirely unnecessary; because the board of treasury had all the powers the bill proposed to invest in commissioners vested in them already. Mr. Sheridan said, the minute of the treasury which he had moved would, he trusted, bear him out in this assertion; but as it was not presented before Friday last, he really had not time to read it with sufficient attention to speak upon it at that moment; but he was pretty confident it was sufficient ground for him to stand on. At present, if he objected at all to the report, he should have moved, by way of amendment, to leave out the names of the commissioners, and to insert, in their stead, the names of the lords of the treasury. But not seeing any particular reason to press the debate then, he would let the bill be made as good a bill as it possibly could be; and then, in its perfect state, argue against its principle. Mr. Sheridan said farther, that the same argument that applied in objection to the former bill, applied in objection to the present. That objection had been used in the other house, where, when the former bill had been thrown out, complaint had been made of its being left to them to do dirty work, and to throw out a popular bill. Mr. Sheridan added, that the former bill had certainly been a bill the most nonsensical, absurd, and ridiculous, that ever was framed, and the authors of it had been heartily ashamed of it.

MARCH 8.

OFFICE REFORM BILL.

The order of the day, that this bill be read a third time, was moved and read, MR. SHERIDAN rose to make good his assertions of the preceding day, relative to there being no necessity for any such bill; as the board of treasury already possessed full powers to do every thing which the bill avowed for its object. He began by observing, that it was not the same bill as that of a former session, since at least four-fiths of the former bill were not in the present. He then stated the minute of the board of treasury in Lord Shelburne's administration; and reasoned upon it as a proof that an inquiry, similar to that proposed to be instituted by the bill, had been gone into. He quoted the minute of the board of treasury likewise in the Duke of Portland's administration, to prove that they had also ordered a similar inquiry. He next examined the qualifications of two of the three com

« PreviousContinue »