adverting to the recent trials in the Court of King's-bench, Guildhall, observed, that a charge having been established against two members of parliament, deeply involving their public and private honour, he felt it to be his duty, in maintenance of the character of that House, to give notice that, at no very distant period, he would call the attention of the House to the subject. He was only apprehensive that there might be some objection, in point of regularity, to his giving that notice at present; but perhaps some honourable gentleman might relieve him from this difficulty.

expressed his satisfaction to hear that an early opportunity would be embraced, of calling the attention of the House to this subject. He conceived that the hon. gentleman would feel no difficulty in fixing such a day for his notice as might be most convenient both to the House and to himself; provided that he did not name an earlier day than Tuesday. By the course of legal proceedings, it was competent to any party convicted, as the parties had been to whom the hon. gentleman referred, to apply to the court, within the four first days of the term after such conviction, either to grant a new trial, or to arrest judgment. Now, as term commenced that day, and as such an application was possible, he suggested to the hon. gentleman the propriety of deferring his notice until the period prescribed by law had expired. In making this suggestion, he begged not to be understood as intimating the probability of such an application as either of those to which he had alluded. Prevented by his official duties, and by his duty as a member of that House, from taking any part in the proceedings in the late trial, he was not better informed with respect to them than any other hon. gentleman; and he hoped, therefore, he should not be so presumptuous as to offer, or even to form, any opinion as to the probability of any application, or as to the probability of the success of any application, if made.

in compliance with the suggestion of the hon. and learned gentle. man, gave notice, that on Tuesday he would submit to the House a motion founded on the result of the late trial.

said, that it might be for the convenience of the hon. gentleman, and of the House, to know, that in all such proceedings as that in contemplation, the first step was to bring before the House proof of the fact. After that was done, the party implicated had notice to appear in his place, and, if he should think proper, to defend himself from the charge preferred against him; and thereupon, and not till then, the extreme proposition was made. If, therefore, the hon. gentleman gave any notice, it must only be a notice that he would move to take the introductory step to the ulterior proceedings.

then finally gave notice, that on Tuesday next he would move for a copy of the conviction.

promised that no delay should take place in the production of that document; but that the preparation of it should be immediately forwarded.

was pleased at having the duration of the pension extended; but, at the same time, he was concerned to find, that his Majesty's ministers were not inclined to increase the amount of it from 2,000l. to 3,000l. as he had proposed. He knew that the honour of the peerage was the real reward for the services for which it was given; but at the same time when it was deemed proper for the public good, and for the encouragement of great exertions, to give the peerage, he thought that parliament should take care to provide the means of supporting it with independence. As for lord Hill himself, small as his income would be, and inferior to that of almost any other peer, yet his high character and great services would enable him to enter the House of Peers without any sense of inferiority to any other person. He would, besides, have some addition to that income from his military appointments; but his successors who should enter that House with no other provision than the 2,000l. a year, would be necessarily thrown into a state of dependence upon the court. He then instanced the cases of lords Rodney, Duncan, and St. Vincent, who, although all of them supposed to be possessed of private fortunes, had pensions not only of 2,000l. per annum on the English establishment, but an additional thousand on the Irish. Now, if before the Union with Ireland, 3,000l. per annum were actually given to those persons who were raised to this peerage for their services, he thought that a less sum ought not to be given now. It might be said that there was a distinction, as those peers had been commanders in chief', and lord Hill had only a subordinate command. He thought, however, that there should be no distinction made on that account, when the services performed by a person in a subordinate command were conceived to merit the honour of the peerage.

said, that from the enquiry he had made into the particular circumstances of this case, he saw no reason to make a distinction from what was usually granted, and therefore he thought it much better to adhere to the precedents of former grants. When the peerage was first conferred upon the duke of Wellington, after the battle of Talavera, 2,000l. a year was the pension granted. The same annuity was granted to lord Nelson, after the battle of the Nile. In both cases, most eminent services had been rendered, and yet 2,000l. per annum was in both cases the grant. It was an invidious task to enquire into the private circumstances of any individual, but on inquiry he did not find that the fortune of the noble lord in question was such as to make a greater addition to it more necessary than it would be to many other noble individuals.

in consequence of a question put to him by Mr. Wynn, de-clared that he could not recollect whether there had been any intention to propose to the Irish parliament an additional thousand a year to lord Nelson. He thought, however, that generally speaking, it was an invidious task to enter into minute comparisons either respecting the services or the private circumstances of those who were thus raised to the peerage. He thought it much better to adhere to one general rule.

considered that a grant of 2,000l. per annum was utterly insufficient to support the dignity of the peerage. If 20 years ago it appeared that 3,000l. per annum was actually given, how could 2,000l. a year be supposed sufficient now, when the value of money was hardly more than half what it was then. Although lord Hill himself might be able to support his dignity, how was it possible that his eldest son should? The very dignity of the peerage would prevent him from entering into any of those professions in which men possessing talents might otherwise resort. The son of lord Hill would therefore have less means of providing for his family, than if he had not been a peer, and in this manner the descendants of lord Hill might be injured instead of benefited by the dignity thus imposed upon them. He did not conceive that this was a proper mode of encouraging great exertions in the public service.

observed, that although the services of lord Hill had been so great as justly to entitle him to the honour that was conferred on him, yet it must be recollected how many other brave officers, lieutenant-generals, had highly distinguished themselves, and trod very close upon the heels of the noble lord, in services to the country. To those men who had themselves rendered such important services, it might appear an injustice, if not only the honour of the peerage, but a grant exceeding all former grants in such cases, were to be conferred on lord Hill.

was for the additional 1,000l. a year, which was proposed by Mr. Wynn, as conceiving that a man, who had no private fortune, could not support the dignity of the peerage on 2,000l. per annum.

said, that he felt himself obliged to oppose the amendment moved by his hon. friend. It was a thing of extreme delicacy and difficulty, as well as a most invidious office, to enter minutely into the comparative merits and circumstances of all those distinguished persons who were raised to the peerage on account of great services rendered to the public. When that great general, the duke of Wellington, who commanded all those generals, was first raised to the peerage, he had asked some questions as to his private fortune, which he had then supposed to be larger than it was. When, however, the last question was submitted to the House about his provision, he had proposed an addition to that which ministers had recommended, and his proposal was unanimously adopted by the House. The reason why he then proposed the addition was, that he thought the services of the duke of Wellington were beyond all comparison superior to those of any other person, and that they could not be matched by the services rendered by any military man for the last century. The House should bear in their mind, that as to the pensions of 3,000l. a year, which other peers had obtained, 2,000l. of it was only for the lives of the two next in succession to the title, and the 1,000l. a year from Ireland, was, as he believed, only for the life of the person to whom it was granted. Under those circumstances, he conceived that the pension of 2,000l. which was now proposed to be continued to every successor to the title, was really a better provision for the independence of the peerage than the 3,000l. a year for the lives of the two next in succession.

hoped that ministers would recommend the giving lucrative military situations to those officers who had so greatly distinguished themselves.

Mr. Wynn then withdrew his amendment, and the original resolution was carried.

suggested, that as that was the day proposed for the consideration of the Treaty, whether it would not be better to appoint some other day for the Army Estimates. He also wished to know whether it was the intention of ministers to bring down the papers relating to the negociations carried on at Chatillon? He had no doubt that the conduct of his Majesty's government was perfectly just and proper. But in consequence of the failure of those negociations, the Treaty of Chaumont was concluded, by which this country had agreed to furnish five millions to the support and continuance of the war. He therefore thought, that as, in the present state of the world, there could be no danger in disclosing the proceedings, it would be more satisfactory to the House to know on what grounds they had voted this sum. He also wished to know what were the dispositions of the late government of France with respect to the abolition of the slave trade. He must confess, that the concessions on that point to the present French government, were such as in his mind destroyed all the satisfaction he should otherwise have felt from the Treaty itself.

in reply, said, that it was his intention to postpone the discussion of the Treaty, from Friday to an early day in the following week. He thought the most convenient mode for the hon. member to pursue with respect to the subject of the proceedings at Chatillon would be to postpone any step upon it till after the discussion upon the Treaty had taken place. He himself had no reluctance personally to laying the papers before the House; but he conceived that, on the general principle, it would be establishing an inconvenient precedent, to communicate papers and proceedings to parliament, which had led to no definitive conclusion. In answer to the last question of the hon. member, respecting the slave trade, be had no hesitation in stating, that the same proposition was made to the former government of France as was made to the present. The humane and benevolent disposition of the king of France would, he hoped, effect more than was done by negociation. With respect to the former government of that country, as far as he could learn, there was a general repugnance to the abolition of the trade.

said he did not impute any blame to the noble lord; but because the House was called upon to vote large sums of money, in consequence of that convention, he merely called for those papers upon the subject which were already printed. With respect to the slave trade, to talk of humanity and benevolence, were mere words. The truth was, that all the horrors of the trade were revived by the Treaty.

was of opinion that some presumptive blame should be made out, to ground the production of the papers in question. Their being printed was a proof that, if necessary, there would have been no repugnance to bring them before the House.

said, the hon. member for Wiltshire, whom he did not see in his place, had given notice of a motion on a peculiarly delicate subject (the Princess of Wales) for Tuesday. He should be most happy if any thing should occur to postpone the discussion of that subject entirely, but otherwise, he conceived that as many members would probably be absent at Oxford on that day, it would perhaps be better to defer the subject till Thursday.

deprecated the agitation of the question as much as the hon. member, and should be as happy as any individual in the House or the country to see it brought to an amicable adjustment out of the House. He, however, concurred in the propriety of the hon. member's proposal to have it brought forward on Thursday, instead of Tuesday.

said it was ridiculous in those to talk of deprecating the agitation of a question, who had it in their power to remove the necessity for it altogether.

It was accordingly understood that Mr. Methuen's motion would stand over for Thursday.

enquired whether the subsidies were included in the preceding sum, not omitting those to Sicily?

replied, that they were not included; but he apprehended they would not exceed a million and a half, though he could not state the precise amount at present.

said, that he thought the sum required by the right hon. gentleman for the army extra ordinaries extremely moderate. They had amounted last year to 16,000,0001. but he understood the whole extra ordinaries for the present year would not exceed nine millions; and when it was considered how very great had necessarily been our expenditure during the last six months, the reduction was certainly considerable.

in reply to a question from Mr. Whitbread, stated, that it would not be possible to say precisely what would be the amount of force necessary to be employed or kept in pay between the period of signing the definitive treaty of peace between this country and France, and the general arrangement of the affairs of Europe. It never had been the policy of any country suddenly to disband an army pending negociations.

wished to know whether any final arrangements had been made with respect to the home staff? Ministers, he thought, must have made up their minds as to the reduction that was intended to take place; and it was highly desirable that the public should see that every practicable retrenchment would be made as soon as possible. If the noble lord was not prepared to state the precise extent of the intended reduction of the home staff, he thought it would be better to withdraw that part of the estimates relating to it until some final arrangement was completed.

said, that no distinction existed between troops employed at home and those employed abroad, and therefore till a plan for putting the army at large upon a peace establishment was settled, it was impossible to determine what would be the precise reduction of the home staff. A considerable one certainly would take place, though none had yet been made. The very act, indeed, of disembodying the militia and reducing the regular army, required as much staff assistance nearly as any other service.

said, he really could not comprehend why the noble lord could not make an estimate of how many generals, how many lieutenant-generals, how many major-generals, and so on, it was intended to retain upon the home-staff In the present state of this country and of Europe, the House had a right to expect that a peace estimate should be laid before it, instead of which, they were called upon to vote a sort of war estimate upon account.

contended that it was impossible to make such a specific estimate at present as the hon. gentleman seemed to wish.

After some further conversation between Mr. Huskisson, Mr. Bennet, Mr. Bankes and lord Palmerston, the resolution was agreed to.