Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

the appointment of writers and cadets by the directors, (supposing that court to be under the guidance of ministers) was placed at so great a distance, that it gave no new or unconstitutional patronage to the crown. Upon the influence from the appointment of governors and commanders in chief, which the right hon. gentleman had asserted to be indirectly in the crown, though directly in the company, he would only say, that no new influence was here grasped at, since the existing system was only to be continued. This system, however, had been reprobated as vicious and disgraceful; and these heavy censures, supported by a reference to the 11th clause of he bill of 1784, though that clause was not in the least applicable to the subject. That clause, as the right hon. gentleman had said, went only to establish the power of the commissioners for the affairs of India, to require the most full information from the directors; but the sixth clause, upon which the declaratory bill rested, was over looked by him, because it would not answer his purpose; for it establishes," that the board shall be fully authorized and empowered, from time to time, to superintend, direct, and control all acts, operations, and concerns, which in any wise relate to the civil or military government or revenues of the British territorial possessions in the East Indies," so that the declaratory bill, in fact, was only a fuller explanation of the bill of 1784. Mr. Pitt next begged the attention of the House to a subject, which the right hon. gentleman himself had introduced, viz. the influence which his own bill was to give, compared with that at present under consideration. By the one, not only the appointments at home, but all the appointments abroad, were to be in his commissioners; by the other, the whole appointments were to be left with the directors, reserving the power of recall to the king. However unwilling I am (said Mr. Pitt) to enter farther into this comparison, I must be forgiven for pointing out, that by the right hon. gentleman's bill, from writers and cadets to the highest offices in India, not less than four hundred offices were to be in the nomination of his commissioners. I will admit that this bill did not apparently tend to increase the influence of the crown; but a very slight attention to its provisions will discover, that it either might be used to increase the influence of the crown, or to diminish it, and in a manner subversive of the constitution. It

would have increased it, when these commissioners should choose to act in union with the crown; and it would have decreased it, when they might chuse to act independently of the crown; that is, the right hon. gentleman's bill created an immense patronage, which was to be concentrated in a political party, formidable to the crown when in opposition, and adding to its influence when in power, Upon this subject, however, the public opinion was made up at the time, and had continued unaltered. Had that bill passed into a law, our happy constitution would have been subverted. The right hon. gentleman, indeed, had limited the power to be given to his commissioners to the period of four years; that was during the period of the existing parliament; and, very probably, that might be his reason for the period to which he was now willing to extend the term of the company's charter, without reflecting, that limiting the exclusive privilege to four years, would necessarily cripple the company, preclude them from extending their commerce, and prevent them from contributing, in the manner the present bill proposes, to the resources of the nation.

The House divided on Mr. Fox's Amendment: Yeas, 26: Noes, 132: The Bill was then passed.

Debate in the Commons on the Abolition of the Slave Trade.] May 14. Mr. Wilberforce moved, "That leave be given to bring in a bill for abolishing the Trade carried on for supplying foreign territories with Slaves." The question being put, "that the said motion be referred to a committee of the whole House,"

Mr. Fox, after taking notice of what the House had done last year, and what the Lords were doing in this, upon this subject, warned the House not to trust too much to the good temper of the people, by trifling with their requests, passing resolutions in one session, in one year, by which the public were taught to expect that this infamous traffic should in time be abolished, and then abandoning the whole in another session, by having recourse to the shift of saying, that the subject was before the other House; that it was a dangerous time to meddle with our commerce; or by any such quibbles. This trade was no more like real, fair commerce, than it was like justice or humanity; commerce was disgraced by being compared to it. It was an odious,

a board of agriculture, composed of respectable gentlemen, perfectly conversant in and acquainted with the subject, as well as considerably interested in the success of the scheme, and who, he would propose, should act without any reward or emolument. Various advantages would, as he conceived, be derived from such a plan, and the expense would not exceed 3,000l. in salaries to clerks, &c. This being a public board, would, no doubt, have the privilege of franking; and one very material benefit of it would be, the establishing a free communication of the different improvements in agriculture, from one part of the country to another. He concluded with moving,

monstrous, inhuman traffic, and a foul stain upon the British character. Such the majority of the House thought it last year; such the mass of the people thought it then such they thought it now; and if they had not renewed their petitions to the House, it was because they had confidence in its justice, its humanity, its honour, and its regard for the consistency of its own proceedings; and gentlemen would do well, if they wished the public to have any esteem for that House, not to teach them that their confidence was misplaced, when they thought that House would perform its duty. He trusted the House would agree to the motion; or that if they thought the House too thin to decide upon a point so important, they would adjourn the debate for a day or two, and go into a committee, and discuss the subject fairly, if any farther discussion was necessary.

Mr. Pitt maintained, that the House ought, in justice to its own character, and in support of its own honour, to adopt the motion now before them.

The House divided: Yeas, 41; Noes, 34. Mr. Wilberforce then moved, "That leave be given to bring in a bill to limit and regulate the importation of slaves to the British colonies, for a time to be limited." After a short conversation, the House divided: Yeas, 25; Noes, 35; so it passed in the negative.

May 22. Mr. Wilberforce moved the order of the day for the House to resolve itself into a committee of the whole House, to consider of a motion for preventing the supply of foreign powers with Slaves; which being carried, a bill was ordered to be brought in for that purpose, which was negatived on the third reading, June 12, by a majority of 31 against 29.

Debate in the Commons on the Institution of a Board of Agriculture.] May 15. Sir John Sinclair rose to submit to the House the motion of which he had given notice, with respect to the state of the Agriculture of this country. The measure he proposed was to be only an experimental one for five years. He then proceeded to state, how much room there was in this country for improvement in agriculture, and the great advantages to be derived from it. Nothing, in his opinion, seemed so likely to effectuate this desirable purpose, as the appointment of

"That an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, entreating, that his majesty would be graciously pleased to take into his royal consideration the advantages which might be derived, by the public, from the establishment of a Board of Agriculture and internal improvement:→ Humbly representing to his majesty, that, though in some particular districts, improved methods of cultivating the soil are practised, yet that, in the greatest part of these kingdoms, the principles of agri culture, are not yet sufficiently understood, nor are the implements of hus bandry, or the stock of the farmer, brought to that perfection of which they are capable:-That his faithful Commons are persuaded, if such an institution. were to take place, that such inquiries might be made into the internal state of the country, and a spirit of improvement so effectually encouraged, as must naturally tend to produce many important national benefits, the attainment of which his majesty has ever shown a most gracious disposition to promote; and, in par ticular, that such a measure might be the means of uniting a judicious system of husbandry to the advantages of domestic manufacturing industry, and the benefits, of foreign commerce, and consequently, of establishing, on the surest and best foundations, the prosperity of his kingdoms:-And if his majesty shall be graciously pleased to direct the institution of such a board, for a limited time, to assure his majesty, that his faithful Commons will cheerfully defray any expense attending the same, to the amount of a sum not exceeding 3,000l. per annum."

Lord Sheffield seconded the motion. Mr. Hussey said, that no member could be more anxious than himself, with re

spect to the objects proposed to be at-pondence, and private societies would be tained; but he wished for more time to left to pay the reward, not upon their investigate the means proposed for that own discretion, but upon that of the new purpose, and the probability of their suc- board. cess; and to consider better, whether, by agreeing to the motion, they might not be holding out false hopes to the country. It was, besides, a subject which ought to be discussed in a much fuller House, and he would therefore propose to adjourn the debate.

Sir W. Dolben, Mr. Wilberforce, Mr. Dundas, and Mr. Pitt, &c. spoke in fayour of the motion; which, as a matter of experiment, promised as well as any that had ever been proposed, at a small expense, in comparison with the benefits likely to arise from it. It was, however, agreed that the debate should be adjourned to the 17th,

May 17. The debate being resumed, Mr. Hussey opposed the motion. He said there was a society established for the same purpose in the Adelphi, supported by voluntary contributions, which had subsisted for forty years. The sum contributed amounted to 1,200l. a year, and they distributed 800l. annually in premiums. Similar societies existed in different parts of the country. He had made many inquiries of those whom he considered most capable of forming an opinion as to the probable good to be expected from the present plan, and he had found none who thought it a proper plan. He was convinced the motives of the hon. baronet were pure, but he could not agree to take 3,000l. a year out of the pockets of the people for the purpose of trying projects.

Mr. Duncombe conceived the improvement of agriculture to be of the highest importance, and, as his expectations from the proposed plan were pretty considerable, he would certainly give it his support.

Mr. D. Scott thought it the duty of the House to protect agriculture as much as they had done commerce, and expressed his approbation of the motion.

Mr. Pulteney supported the motion. The expense was trifling, in proportion to the benefits to be expected from it.

Sir W. Dolben was of opinion, that unless the sum proposed should be doubled, and one half of it distributed in premiums, no practical advantage would arise from the present plan. This board would assume to itself the whole corres

Mr. Sheridan said, it was the first time he had heard of its being a circumstance of degradation to pay rewards: the two following lines, as applied to this country, expressed a very different sentimentFor let people do, or let people say,

It always looks great, to have something to

pay.

In his opinion it was impossible to give a good reason why the public should pay the expense proposed. It was said the commissioners were to act without any reward; but he was always extremely jealous when he found gentlemen too forward and zealous to do good to the public for nothing; upon that footing the Board of Control had been instituted. He had no objection to the principles of the motion, independent of the one he had mentioned, and would therefore conclude with moving, as an amendment to the address, to leave out the latter part of it, and to insert the following words: " provided the same shall not be attended with any expense to the public.

Mr. Fox objected to the original motion, because the measure was in itself objectionable, it being in his opinion a mere job and likely to be converted into an instrument of influence; and because if the measure was a good one, the mode proposed for carrying it into execution was bad. It was to be done by address, and consequently the ministers of the crown would have the nomination of the members of the board, and the means of extending patronage. The crown also might annex what conditions it pleased to the qualification of members, and exclude many able men, by requiring that they should subscribe religious tests. If such a board ought to be instituted at all, it ought to be done by act of parliament, and not by an address; for if done by an act, both Houses would have an opportu nity of examining the regulations of the board, and every thing belonging to it.

Mr. Pitt said it was impossible that the board should be fairly styled an instrument of influence, or the means of extending patronage. The expense was to be 3,000l. a year, but this money was not to be for salaries to the members, but merely for defraying the expense of clerks for doing the ordinary business of the board; and the rest of the sum was

to be laid out in procuring useful information respecting agriculture, and disseminating it through the kingdom.

Mr. Hussey disapproved highly of voting money in that sudden way, instead of originating the matter in a committee of supply, by which means it would be liable to investigation in the different stages of its progress.

Mr. Martin was prejudiced in favour of the address, but he could not agree to vote money in that summary manner.

Mr. Grey said, he would vote for the amendment, though he would rather have wished it had gone the length of giving a direct negative to the motion. It was impossible for him to agree to vote a shilling from the pockets of his constituents for erecting boards and creating expense, at a time when we ought rather to look for every possible reduction of

expense.

Mr. Sheridan's amendment was negatived. The House then divided on the original motion: Yeas, 101; Noes, 26.

The for

such as ought to be followed.
mer was the case of a lion, who made
such a division of the stag, among his
companions of the chase, as was better
suited to his strength, than to justice.
The latter was that of the late partition
of Poland, which proved what the parties
concerned in it dared, rather than what
they ought to do. Who would be the
Frederic and the Catharine of the little
hemisphere borough of Stockbridge, he
could not presume to say; but he was of
opinion that it must strike every one that
the two cases were similar; Poland was
dismembered because some of its people
entertained notions disagreeable to the
neighbouring powers; and the majority
of the electors of Stockbridge were to be
punished, because some of their fellow
inhabitants were said to have abused their
trust; and lest they (the majority) should
ever do the like.-Upon this principle, he
contended parliament might take from
any man his money, because he might
idly spend it in the ale-house.

punish the majority for the guilt of the minority; on the contrary, it was framed on the presumption that the majority of the electors had been guilty of bribery and corruption.

Mr. Eliot said, the hon. baronet was Stockbridge Election Bribery Bill.]-mistaken, if he imagined the bill was to May 27. Mr. Eliot moved the order of the day, for receiving the report of the Committee on the Bill for preventing Bribery and Corruption in the Election of Members for the Borough of Stockbridge. Sir Richard Hill opposed the motion. He said, that the bill went to punish the majority, for the imputed guilt of the minority. The laws of man required that guilt should not only be alleged, but proved before punishment could be justly inflicted; and next, that punishment should fall solely upon the guilty; but, in the present case, the innocent were the persons who were to feel the penalties of the bill. Such a proceeding was no less opposite to the merciful conduct of God towards his creatures, than it was to the rules of justice and equity; for when the wrath of the Almighty was kindled against the wicked city on account of its abominations, the Lord said he would pardon all the inhabitants, if so many as ten innocent persons could be found among them. The true ground on which the bill rested was that of power; and the House was called upon to do an act, not because it was just or equitable, but because parliament was able to do it. He admitted that such a proceeding was not without precedents; for he recollected two, one of which was ancient, the other modern: but he did not think they were

Mr. Ellis said, that by whatever gentle name the bill might be called, it would be in point of effect, a bill of pains and penalties; and as an ex post facto law, it would punish individuals for acts done before the passing of that law. The bill appeared to him objectionable in another point of view; for it could not fail to lessen the value of the property of men, who were not only not guilty of any crime, but not so much as accused. The right of voting at Stockbridge was resident in householders; the property of the houses and of the ground on which they stood, was not in the tenants; and yet for the misconduct of these, the owners were to have their estates depreciated in value; for no doubt the value must be lowered, if a man to whose estate was annexed a 150th share of the power of returning two members to serve in parliament, was to have so many new electors poured in upon him as to reduce it to a 1,500th share.

Mr. Buxton considered the bill as a desirable and practical mode of reforming parliament. It did not come recommend ed to him by wild theory or speculation,

but by experience; the bills of the same nature, which had passed for regulating elections at Shoreham and Cricklade, had been productive of much good; and therefore a similar system with respect to Stockbridge, it might well be expected, would be attended with the desired effect of preventing bribery and corruption in that borough for the future.

Mr. Barham said, it was by no means the case that the majority of the electors of Stockbridge had been guilty of bribery, for though the total amount exceeded 180, the bill for disfranchising such as had appeared to the committee to have sold their votes, contained the names of no more than 63.

The Attorney General condemned the system of proceeding by a bill of pains and penalties against men, on account of a business before a select committee, in which the parties accused of having sold their votes, could not, by any process or colour of law, make their innocence appear, however innocent they might be. The decision of that committee, with respect to the right of the petitioners to a seat in that House was by law final and conclusive; but there was no other question before them, on which they could finally decide; and consequently, the parties which might be collaterally implicated in the consequences of their determination, could not before their tribunal defend their cause, and guard against those consequences. To bills of pains and penalties, to ex post facto laws, he was a determined enemy: a man ought not to be punished by any law which was not in existence when the act to be punished was done. If gentlemen were friends to such bills as the present, merely because they were steps towards a parliamentary reform, he thought it would be much more manly, and much more consonant to the general principles of justice and equity, for them to move at once for a bill for reforming the representation of the people in parliament, than to attempt to attain that by means repugnant to the laws of England, and to every idea of sound jurisprudence.

weight, because the parliamentary franchise was a trust to be exercised, not for the benefit of the individual who possessed but for the general good of the whole community; and when it appeared that this trust had been abused, it was the duty of parliament to guard against a future abuse of it, by passing such a bill, as that which was then under consideration.

The House divided: For receiving the Report 33; Against it 41. The bill, of course, was lost.

He

Sir C. Bunbury's Resolutions respecting Convicts for Transportation]. May 31. Sir C. Bunbury said, that in prefacing his motion it was his wish to imitate what was deemed that art of oratory amongst the ancients, namely, the saying much in a few words, rather than the modern practice of saying little in a great many. But, exclusive of such claim on the atten tion of the House, he believed it would be a sufficient apology if he assured it, that his object was to lessen the sum of human misery, and to prevent an unnecessary expenditure of the public treasure. conceived that not only humanity, but policy ought to induce ministers to turn their thoughts towards the unhappy Convicts destined for Transportation. He cal led the attention of the House to their si tuation after sentence. They were assembled in our common yard in Newgate, and other unimproved prisons, where they remained many months in rags, filth, and idleness, and afterwards they were sent on board the hulks, where they frequently staid a long time; by which those whose morals were not totally depraved, were rendered completely so by this mischievous and impolitic association, He estimated, that of the seven years transportation, which was the sentence of the court, two years were mis-spent in indolence and bad company; reckoning one year consumed in gaol and on board the hulks, the average passage to New South Wales six months, and six months for their return, each of which voyages cost 207. per man, so that the system was as expensive as it was baneMr. Hardinge said, he was a friend to ful; and if they were not brought back it the bill; because,. in the first place, bri- was still worse, as it was a flagrant breach bery ought to be suppressed, and in the of justice; nearly one-third of their term, next because bills of this nature had in and sometimes more, was thus wasted in a two instances produced all the salutary manner not only adverse to reformation, consequences that had been expected from but calculated to augment their depravity them. The objection that the bill would and make them thieves during their lives. lessen the value of property in Stock-" Associate and reform," exclaims the bridge, he would not allow to have any patriot. This maxim might be just res

« AnteriorContinuar »