opposed the Speaker's leaving the chair. He said, he had a radical objection to this mode of laying on taxes by piece-meal, without the intervention of a proper time for considering the general state in which they stood. The right hon. gentleman might be right in proposing the line of taxation for which he was about to move, but it was to the principle of the proceeding that he had so decided an objection. The House was in ] this manner called to lay on particular taxes, without a fair discussion as to the general state of the revenue, of which they were to- form a part. One sum was moved for at one time, then followed another at a different period, and the general financial statement did not make its appearance until so late a period of the session, that no attendance for its discussion could be expected. To the plan pursued in the Ways and Means he had in particular an objection, because in his opinion, the entire wants of the country should be laid before them, instead of this partial disposal of them. He would prefer, that a real estimate of the revenue of Ireland, compared with the expenditure of that country, should be fairly produced. The idea was delusive of raising additional sums there, when it was avowedly unable to meet its own debt. He could have no objection to Ireland paying her fair proportion of the public burthens, but this mode prevented his really ascertaining what that proportion was; he therefore hoped the Fight hon. gentleman would defer his measure until a future period.

said, that if any delusion prevailed with respect to the financial situation of the country, that delusion was not imputable to him. He, on the contrary, had always stated to Parliament the circumstances in which Ireland was placed, and had not concealed from Ireland the sacrifices that she would be called upon to make. He had desired to make no partial statement; but he apprehended that the course which, with the approbation of the House, his right hon. friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer for England, had proceeded on in this country, was equally open to him to follow; nay, he took blame to himself that he had not followed it before. Were not the votes of supply, were not the military and naval votes granted for the joint service of the United Kingdom? Was not the admitted deficiency of the Irish revenue, was not the statement of the right hon. baronet himself, a sufficient justification of the proceedings? It was idle to deny it. What now was he blamed for? He would anticipate, if he were permitted, the sitting of the committee for a moment or two, and would mention the nature of his resolution. He had some time since mentioned to the right hon. baronet, that he had new duties of customs in contemplation; that which he was about to pro- pose was, a duty on tobacco equal to that lately laid on in Great Britain, Parliament having recognized the principle of assimilation; and he was only anxious that the resolution should bear this date, that the importing merchant in Ireland might know the duty he would be liable to pay from this date, upon the passing of the Bill, and not have to complain of any surcharge of which he had not full notice. Would not this be preferable to waiting until after the importation from the United States, and being obliged either to take stock on hand, or to allow the vender to raise the price of his commodity by the full amount of the new duty which the public, as consumers, would pay, and the revenue receive nothing? In compliance with the expressed wish of the right hon. baronet, he had declined moving this duty when the English duty was imposed: but the ratification of the treaty with America, had made it necessary to lose no farther time, if we would have a productive source of revenue. The right hon. baronet had wished for an exposition of our resources before he voted any thing. Did be then think that we had a redundance? Did be not himself tell the House, on a former night, the fearful amount of our deficit? Did be not know that no budget could be brought forward for Ireland until after the English budget was stated—until the estimated expenditure of both countries was ascertained, and the share of Ireland's contribution to the joint account fairly stated? If the right hon. baronet wished to defer it for the purpose of having full discussion, he apprehended that he was affording him the means of that discussion, by not waiting until that time arrived. He had only one other point to notice, which he would take this occasion of doing; that, sensible as he was of the great importance of a review of our finances, and far from wishing to create delusion or prolong it, he would now give notice, that either he, or his right hon. friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer of England, would, probably on the first day after parliament met again, propose the revival of the committee of finance, in the hope that they would be able to present to the House a fair view of our resources and of our wants, in which he should be glad of the right hon. baronet's assistance.

rose to lay upon the table the Petition from Mr. Lathrop Murray, of which he had given notice yesterday. Of the individual he knew nothing, and in general he was averse to the interference of the House with the proceedings of courts of justice; but in some cases of peculiar circumstances, such an interference might be necessary and useful. The individual who this day came before the House, had been recently convicted of bigamy before the Recorder of the city of London. Sir S. Romilly said he had had an opportunity of seeing the whole of the case and the evidence, and it appeared that the allegations in the petition upon that authority, were well founded. The fact was, that at the age of eighteen, the petitioner, being with his regiment in Ireland, was married to a woman much older than himself, in a private room, by a dissenting minister (he not being himself a dissenter), without banns, licence, or any of the usual formalities. Some years ago he married a woman in England by licence, and his second wife was fully apprised of the facts attending his first marriage, which was properly held to be invalid. For this offence he was indicted by a total stranger, and the only evidence was, that of the dissenting minister who had officiated at the first marriage; and to prove the second, the register and the declarations of the petitioner. At the trial his counsel had taken several objections, which they urged should be reserved for the decision of the Judges, but by some mistake the points were not reserved and sentence of transportation was passed upon the prisoner. Until 1795, sir S. Romilly observed the punishment for bigamy had been only twelve months imprisonment, and burning in the hand; but at that date a statute was passed, empowering the Judges to transport for seven years: but this severity was only exercised in cases of great flagrancy; and in the present it seemed natural to expect that an imprisonment for six, nine, or twelve months, would have been ordered. The Attorney General refusing to give his fiat for a writ of error, as the objections had been omitted on the record, the petitioner applied, but in vain, to the Secretary of State's office, and from thence to the Prince Regent for a pardon, or for liberty to transport himself, accompanying his prayer with an affidavit of his second wife, that she was acquainted with all the circumstances of his first marriage, and with the opinion of several civilians that the first marriage was illegal. The only answer returned was, that he must be sent with the other felons to Botany Bay, and in consequence he was compelled to make the present application to the House for relief.

said, that he had, heard something of this case; and if the petitioner did not deserve transportation for bigamy, he did for swindling; for he had, on a former occasion, been married in Ireland, by a respectable dissenting minister, Mr. Black, to a young girl who had a fortune of 500l.; after he got this money, he deserted the girl, and never afforded her the smallest support.

hoped the learned gentleman would withdraw the petition, as the case of the petitioner was at present under consideration.

said, that the marriage of a minor in Ireland could not be set aside, according to the laws of that country (which he presumed was proved by Dr. Black upon the petitioner's trial), unless a suit for that purpose was commenced within twelve months after such marriage had been celebrated. But this was not stated to have been the case with respect to the petitioner.

recommended the consideration of the petitioner's case.

seconded the suggestion of his right hon. relative (Mr. Addington), adding, that should the learned gentleman withdraw the petition, he might of course present it again, if the decision of the executive government should not be agreeable to his judgment.

, after animadverting upon the extraordinary doctrine of the hon. baronet, that because a man had been guilty of a certain offence, he ought to be punished for that of which he had not been guilty; and also upon the opinion of the learned judge (Dr. Duigenan), that the House should decide upon what he "presumed" a certain witness to have deposed upon the trial of the petitioner; consented to withdraw the petition, upon the understanding that the right hon. gentleman would let him know when the proper department should have decided upon the appeal of the petitioner, who was induced to request the presentation of this petition to the House, apprehending that from the delay of any answer to his application to the Secretary of State, he ] might be sent out of the country with other convicts, who, it was understood, were about, to sail.

rose, pursuant to his notice, to call the attention of the House to a letter from the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department, to the Colonial Department, respecting the admission of aliens into this country. In all periods of our history, the Legislature had taken care to keep open the ports and harbours of-Great Britain, for distressed strangers; and it was the glory of this country, that when protection could not be afforded to them, by other nations, they were sure of finding an asylum here. At an early period of the French revolution, precautionary measures were adopted; and though it was not incumbent on him to discuss the propriety of that law, yet it was material to observe, that the Legislature had placed strict guards over those who were entrusted with the exercise of its powers. This was enough to shew the jealousy of Parliament on the subject. With the first French war the first Alien Act expired; it was revived soon after the commencement of the second French war, and nearly in the same form and manner, and with the same powers and restrictions, as the former Act. What, then, was the surprise of himself and of several other members, when they found, on the discussion of the conduct of sir s James Duff, that the following letters were laid before, the House? The first was a copy of a dispatch from lord Bathurst to sir James Duff, dated November 29, 1814, to this effect:—"Sir; It having been represented to his Majesty's government, that you have directed the masters of all British vessels touching at Cadiz, not to depart from that port with any Spanish subjects on board, unless such Spanish subjects should be provided with your passport, or with one from the government of Spain, I am to request that you will acquaint me how far this is founded on fact," &c. In answer, sir James Duff wrote as follows: "I beg leave to represent to your lordship, that in virtue of the orders of his Majesty's government, it has been the practice at this port, since June 1813, to allow no aliens to go passengers in British merchant vessels or packets, to any of his Majesty's dominions, unless provided with proper passports "Sanctioned by his Majesty's ambassador whilst he resided there, and since then by me; and that, to prevent the possibility of any evasion, British subjects were requested to conform to that regulation. At the request of the governor of this city, I renewed that order, &c." Then came the letter from J. H. Addington, esq. to Edward Cooke, esq. to which sir James Duff had referred in justification of his conduct: it was dated May 4., 1813, more than eighteen months before lord Bathurst's dispatch, and was to the following purport: "Sir; in order to prevent, as far as may be practicable, the introduction from the Continent, of aliens of suspicious character into this country and its dependencies, it appears to lord Sidmbuth desirable, that instructions should be given to his Majesty's ministers at foreign courts, and to the British consuls and agents on the Continent, to require that such persons as may propose to embark for any part of the British dominions, should, in the first instance, apply to them to be furnished with passports for that purpose; and his lordship is also of opinion that, in all case, when either the character of the person applying for such passport, or the object which he has in view may be objectionable, it would be expedient to refuse it. N. B. A printed copy of this letter was forwarded on the Gift of May, 1813, from, the Foreign Office, to all his Majesty's consuls in foreign countries, for their guidance." Now, he would ask the House, whether there ever existed a case in which such extensive powers were so delegated, or conveyed in a manner so loose and improper? But there was something further, which marked it more strongly. It would have been a great dereliction of duty not to have communicated to the House the reasons of taking such an extraordinary step; but between the interval of writing this letter and the discovery of it, the Alien Act; which would have expired, was re-enacted and brought specially before the House. Was not that the period at which this letter should have been submitted to the House? Was it not proper, as the question did not pass sub silentio, and some of his Majesty's ministers; participated in the debate, that this measure should have been communicated? During that time, this circular

^*For copies of the several documents referred to in the course of this debate, see Vol. xxix, pp. 596, 740.

] letter was in force; and when the Bill for continuing the Alien Act was submitted to the House, no notice was taken with respect to passports for foreigners who wished to come to this country. On the contrary, there were passages directly negativing the possibility of such a thing as passports having been granted. The House knew nothing of that fact, and would not have known of it at present, if sir James Duff had not relied on this letter for his justification. But if the Legislature, for good and wise reasons, thought proper to depart from a general system, and to intrust to the highest offices of this country a temporary power, under the Alien Act, was fit that the Secretaries of State should delegate any of those powers without the authority of Parliament? And who were the persons to whom such powers were delegated? He wished the House to consider the situation in which consuls in foreign countries were placed. It was justly remarked by an hon. and learned friend of his^* on a former occasion, that if such a power had been entrusted to consuls at the revocation of the edict of Nantes, none of the victims of Louis the 14th's tyranny would have made their escape out of France. It could not be denied, how respectable soever the characters of some of those consuls might be, that many temptations might induce them to co-operate with the governments of those countries in which they resided. But it appeared that they were not only to examine into the characters of the persons applying for passports, but also into the objects which they had in view. Did not the House perceive, that such persons might have to complain of the conduct of that very consul to whom they were to apply? Was it not monstrous, then, that the power of refusing passports should be vested in such hands? Yet this was not all; many of the consuls were engaged in commercial speculations, and it might happen, that the party who wanted to come to this country wished to embark in a similar branch of trade. It was, therefore, a high breach of duty in the great officers of state to commit the execution of their powers to any such persons,—powers which they exercised in this country under the control of the Legislature. It was sufficient for him to show, that in no one part of the Act was there any thing

^*Sir James Mackintosh. See Vol. 29, p. 1145.

like a power for them to shift the responsibility from themselves, or rather to delegate the powers of the Act to any other persons. It would be incumbent on the House to mark their sense of that transaction, and he would therefore submit his motion to them. The right hon. Baronet then moved:

1. "That it appears to this House, from documents laid before it, that instructions were issued, on the 6th of May, 1813, from the office of the Secretary of State for Foreign affairs, of the recommendation of the Secretary of State for the Home department, to all his Majesty's ministers and consuls in foreign countries, to require that such aliens as might propose to embark for any part of the British dominions should apply to be furnished with passports for that purpose; and that in all cases when either the character of the person applying for such, passports, or the object which he had in, view, may be deemed objectionable, it would be expedient to refuse it:

2. "That no communication whatever was made to Parliament of such instructions having been issued until the 14th of February, 1815, a period of nearly two years, and then only in consequence of an inquiry into the conduct of sir James Duff, consul-general at Cadiz, on a subject incidentally connected therewith, although a Bill for renewal of the Alien Act, under certain modifications (in aid of which Act such instructions were avowedly issued), was submitted to the consideration of both Houses of Parliament, and passed, into a law in the month of July, 1814; neither was any notice taken in the said Act of any passports having been required to be procured by such aliens as might arrive in the United Kingdom conformably to such instructions:

3."That the extraordinary powers intrusted by the Alien Act to the principal Secretaries of State in Great Britain, or the Lord Lieutenant or his Chief Secretary in Ireland, to be exercised under the immediate view and control of Parliament, could be only warranted by the exigency of the case, and ought not in any degree, or under any circumstances, to have been delegated by those great officers of state to any other persons, without the knowlege and authority of Parliament; still less should they have enabled all the consuls residing in foreign countries to prohibit, at their discretion, the embarkation of aliens for the United Kingdom; a power ] presenting great temptations to abuse by subordinate agents, and liable to be frequently perverted to objects of extortion or oppression."

thought that the right hon. baronet was under considerable misapprehensions. The letter of which he complained was a mere measure of vigilant precaution in the Secretary of the Home Department, to whom the execution of the Alien Act was entrusted. It would be for the House to decide, whether, in the exercise of his powers, there was any thing criminal in this transaction. On a former occasion, he had detailed the motives which induced the department to which he belonged to circulate that order; and he would now repeat, that it was issued in consequence of the constant complaints of the number of aliens—little less than twenty thousand—who were in this country, and of the necessity of preventing the admission of those whose characters were liable to suspicion. Various instances have occurred of aliens having arrived at the outports, who were suspected of ill designs, but who were afterwards' permitted to proceed, because sufficient grounds of their intentions had not been adduced: The principal object therefore was, to remove those impediments from aliens in general, and to permit them to land and proceed. The persons who were entrusted with the power of granting passports, were those who must be best acquainted, with the character and motives of the persons applying for them: but the fact was, that this power was not delegated, as the right hon. baronet had conceived; under the Alien Act, but by virtue of the acknowledged prerogative of the Crown, to refuge admission to aliens of any description. Such prerogative existed before the Alien Act was passed; and, therefore, this letter left aliens to a certain degree where it found them; it did not oblige aliens to apply for passports, and persons who knew that no suspicion attached to their conduct could come to this country without them. Since this regulation was adopted, not one single instance had occurred of ah individual coming without a passport, who was refused admission. He wished to draw the attention of the House to the general expressions of the letter; and he would ask any gentleman, whether, under the circumstances in which it was written, it could apply to any aliens but those who were strongly inspected of hostile inten- tions towards the government of this country? The letter was dated on the 4th of May, 1813, when the war on the Continent was not terminated. It had been much the practice of gentlemen opposite, and particularly of the member for Bedford, to charge the Secretary of State for the Home Department with exercising his power under the Alien Act with extravagant rigour; but he (Mr. A.) had discovered two papers in his office, which would shew what precautions were resorted under former administrations. The first was written when the right hon. Baronet himself held a distinguished situation, and when a most respectable nobleman was at the head of the Home Departments. It was dated Dec. 16, 1806, and was addressed to Mr. Reeves, directing that no aliens who had not resided in England were to be permitted to come from the Continent, except under the following regulations: they were to specify, in a detailed manner, who and what they were, their motive's for coming to England, and the port from which they intended to embark; and no alien enemy was to be suffered to come, without the passport of one of his Majesty's ministers resident on the Continent. The other letter, of a subsequent date, was nearly to the same effect; and all he meant to shew by them was, that these precautionary measures did not originate with his noble relative. At the time that those instructions were given to the consuls abroad, nobody could have dreamt of the probability of peace being so soon restored; He was, however, prepared to prove that, independent of the Alien Act, the Crown had the prerogative of sending strangers out of the country. He then read art extract from Blackstone, which stated, "that as to every thing relating to safe conduct for strangers, Puffendorf had very justly resolved, it is left in the power of all states, to take such measures about the admission of strangers, as they think convenient." At the time, however, that the Alien Act was passed, the great majority of the House was decidedly agreed on the adoption of a measure of this nature. He believed the necessity of such a measure had been strongly felt, and he considered it only went to authorise the Secretary of State to do that which, if it did not exist, he would, in some cases, be bound, to do, in the exercise of a sound discretion on his own responsibility.

observed, that the great ] difference between the prerogative, as it was exercised before the passing of the Alien Act, and after it, was, that before the year 1793, the prerogative was regulated by law, and the Secretary of Slate could only justify himself by showing, that he had acted according to law. The sight hon. gentleman had appeared to be greatly surprised, that sir James Duff had justified himself under the authority of the letter that had been sent by the Secretary of State. Until this justification came out it appeared as if that letter had been quite forgotten. The noble Secretary of State (lord Sidmouth) was, to be sure, as good-humoured a person as could be. He had shewn his good humour by forming a part of so many administrations, and amalgamating his principles and opinions so easily with those of so many succeeding administrations. He considered, this, however, to be an ill-humoured act: as it put it in the power of any consul abroad who was in an ill humour, to refuse a passport without any goad reason. The right hon. gentleman had said, that an alien could not be excluded from this country merely for not having a passport. How many strangers, however, not alien, enemies, but alien friends, were, in fact, excluded by sir James Duff's refusing to give them passports. In order to spare the House the trouble of a second debate, he should take that opportunity of stating the case of Don Anselmo Correia, in which, a most unjustifiable transfer of power had been made by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, to M. de. Souza, the Portuguese minister. Because Correia written some lampoons which annoyed M. de Souza, he applied to Mr. Ryder, who was then Secretary of State by whom he was sent to Lisbon, a place which seemed to be peculiarly selected for the reception of persons guilty of political lampoons [a laugh.] Surely, however, it could not be said that there was any thing in such an offence which justified the exercise, of such a power. There was nothing seditious in it, nothing which tended to excite mutiny or disaffection in the army or navy; it, was contained in a Portuguese pamphlet, which, in fact, had never been translated into English. The hon. member next read a letter from Mr. Reeves to a Portuguese gentleman, informing him that it was necessary to have a certificate from the Portuguese minister, before he could receive a licence for remaining here; and contended that such a regulation was transferring the powers of the Alien Act, so far as they related to the Portuguese, to the ambassador of that nation resident here. He had been informed that the practice still continued. For the papers respecting M. Correia it was his intention to move, as soon as the present question was disposed of.

said, that when the hon. gentleman first mentioned this subject in the House, it was the general impression that it was his object to bring a charge against the present Secretary for the Home Department, and he was convinced the hon. gentleman himself had supposed that it was a recent case. Upon investigation, however, it appeared that it was a case which had occurred five years ago, when Mr. Ryder was at the head of the Home department. He should certainly vote against the granting the papers which the hon. member gave notice that the would move for. He would never vote for the production of papers, unless the mover made out, at least, a primâ facie case. If the hon. gentleman only wished, for these papers to enable him to fish out some matter of accusation against the Secretary of State, he should oppose the production of them. If the House were to grant these papers, the hon. gentleman, might then move for all the papers relative to every case of aliens detained in this country for the last twenty-three years. Before he sat dawn, he begged leave to move the previous question upon the right hon. baronet's motion.

made a short reply, in which he contended that the delegation ought not to have taken place without the consent of Parliament.

thought the bright hon. baronet had given to this subject a degree of importance which by no means belonged to it. If ministers were not allowed to male regulations of that nature upon the subject, he did not know what other arrangements they would be allowed to make. It was an arrangement that was, upon the whole, beneficial to the aliens themselves. The wish of Government was, that every alien should present a primâ facie, recommendation of his being a fit person to be admitted into this country. If they could not produce this primâ facie recommendation, it became the duty of Government to make inquiries into their individual case, which would necessarily subject them to some delay. How could if he expected that the cases of 20,000 ] aliens could be carefully examined by the Government, if they did not bring with them a passport or any primâ facie recommendation?

contended, that the extract from Blackstone, which had been read by the right hon. gentleman, did not at all apply to the present question. When Puffendorf stated the right of every state, he only meant the inherent right of every nation to take measures for its own preservation. Puffendorf could not have had in his contemplation, how the prerogative of the Crown in England was restrained in its exercise by Parliament. Certainly there was a power in this country as well as in every other, to exclude such strangers as were conceived to be dangerous. The exercise of the prerogative of the Crown was here restrained in this instance, as in many others, by acts of parliament. Adverting to former periods, he inquired what would have been thought, had the unfortunate beings who fled from the tyranny of Robespierre, been refused an asylum, and been sent back to the scaffold? In proportion to the severity of a law, should be the lenity with which it was understood and put in force. And more particularly should a suspension of a law, founded on one of the most important clauses of Magna Charta, be guarded from a loose and undefined construction. The whole body of consuls and vice consuls amounted to about 23 in number. It was not fitting that they should be entrusted with the power that had been vested in them. Five or six of them were natives of the countries in which they acted; and it was highly improper that they should be empowered to shut the doors of British humanity and hospitality on all those who requested admission.

contended, that the authority of sir William-Blackstone had been properly quoted; for though Puffendorf, to whom he had referred had written on the general law of nations, sir William had applied his reasonings to the positive law of this country. There was no doubt but the Crown enjoyed the power of deciding whether aliens should be here or no. The letter did not act as a prevention to the setting out of foreigners for this country, but as a salutary caution; for should they apply in vain to our consuls for passports, they were still at liberty to proceed to this country, with this disadvantage only, that they would be subjected, on their arrival here, to these in- quiries which would not have been made had they been possessed of a passport.

supported the motion, and alluded to the case of a distinguished member of the Cortes, now residing in honourable poverty in this country, for whom sir James Duff sent a search warrant on board the merchant ships in the port of Cadiz, which, however, he happily escaped. British cousuls should not thus be permitted to disgrace both themselves and their country.

rested his objection to foreign consuls being vested with the power of refusing passports, mainly on the ground that they did not resemble responsible ambassadors; but as many of them carried on trade on their own account, and might have mercantile, prejudices and jealousies to gratify, they might abuse their power to forward their own speculations.

then called the attention of the House to the case of a Portuguese gentleman, named Correia, who, some years since, was sent out of this country, under the Alien Act. He observed, that, in addition to what he had before stalled, he had been positively informed, that no native of Portugal was suffered to remain in this country, except he was furnished with a licence from the Portuguese resident at this Court, and that the person in question, having offended the Portuguese resident, was refused the necessary protection; This circumstance, he conceived, ought to be fully explained. When the right hon. gentleman, on a former occasion, moved for a renewal of the Alien Act, be (Mr. Whitbread) and several of his friends demanded information on one or two transactions that had taken place under this law; and they were answered, that they might as well call for explanation with respect to all the cases of aliens sent out of the country, as confine themselves to those particular instances. He thought it would have been a very desirable thing, if they could have procured such extensive information, for he had no doubt that many abuses of the Act had taken place. The hon. gentleman concluded by moving, "That an humble Address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, that he will ] be graciously pleased to give directions that there be laid before this House, copies of all correspondence which may have passed between his Majesty's principal Secretary of State for the Home Department, John Reeves, esq. of the Alien-office, and his excellency the Portuguese minister resident at the court of London, touching Don Anselmo Correia, a Portuguese, some time since sent out of this kingdom under the provisions of the Alien Act, then in force, together with copies of all letters or remonstrances addressed by the said Don Anselmo Correia to the Secretary of State or the Alien-office, and the answers thereto, if any, together with the date of his departure from this country."

contended, that the hon. member had not made out any primâ facie case whatever, to induce the House to agree to his motion. With respect to the sending Correia out of the country, he appeared to know little more than that such a circumstance had taken place, and he was quite incorrect in his statement of the grounds which occasioned that proceeding.

. —What were the grounds?

. —They were sufficient to authorize the Secretary of State to act as he had done.

. —Does the right hon. gentleman mean to say, that because the Secretary of State thought there were sufficient grounds to justify this proceeding, there was, therefore, no necessity for the House being acquainted with them?

. —It is evident that the Secretary of Stale acted on the presumption, that something improper had been done by Correia; and, in such a case, I am sure the House will not consent to inferfere.

said; the hon. gentleman had made a charge, founded on information he had received; the truth of that information was denied; and, he conceived, the denial on the one side would be considered as fully equivalent to the assertion in the other. If it were necessary for the House to examine all the cases of aliens who had been sent out of the country, then certainly this instance ought to be investigated along with the rest; but he saw nothing in the case now brought before them which called for any marked distinction. He certainly would not go into the particulars of the transaction; but he would state, that, though Correia had written, a libel against the Portuguese government, he was not sent out of this country on that account.

thought, that as abuse had been imputed, there was a distinction between this and the other cases under the Alien Act. The powers given by the Act were so extensive, that they required some interference of the House. In the case of De Berenger papers had been seized, for which there was no authority either in the Alien Act, or the common law.

wished to know, from the noble lord opposite; who, he understood, intended to more, to-morrow, that the House should adjourn till Monday se'nnight, whether the papers relative to the Congress at Vienna, which he intimated his intention of laying before the House, would be ready for the use of members before the recess; and whether it was his intention to lay before the House the instructions given to lard William Bentinck?

said; he had learned, on inquiry, that the papers would not be ready so soon: they should, however, be laid on the table as early as possible. With respect to the instructions given to lord W. Bentinck, they would be produced and, if the information thus afforded, was not sufficient, gentlemen were at liberty to call for any other documents they pleased.

said, it was then impossible that he could fix a precise day for a motion which he intended to bring forward respecting those papers. He should, therefore, give notice generally, that after the recess he should bring forward a motion on that subject.

said, a declaration had been published, in the newspapers of that day, purporting to be a Declaration of the Congress, by which the proceedings of that body were stated to have terminated. He wished to know whether that paper was authentic, and whether the ministers and sovereigns assembled were now proceeding to their respective homes to govern under the principles there determined on.

said, that the present was a specimen of the extent to which the hon. member's system of questions was carried. He (lord C.) had recently declared that the proceedings of the Congress had not yet terminated, and the state ] in which they then were, and now the hon. member wished to know whether that Congress had issued another declaration. The Declaration in question alluded to a state of things which did not exist—the breaking-up of the Congress.

wished to understand whether or no the declaration, was authentic?

said, if the hon. member wished to know whether it had emanated from the Congress at Vienna—at certainly had not.

in rising to submit to the House his promised motion relative to the late extension of the Order of the Bath, regretted that a subject of so serious and important a nature, had not been taken up by some more learned and experienced member than himself. Fully impressed, however, with the necessity of calling the attention of the House to the late modification of the Order of the Bath, he had determined, as no other gentleman seemed inclined to notice it, rather to bring it forward himself, under every risk, than to run the chance of its not being at all submitted to their consideration. In the first place, he wished to guard against any misapprehension to which his observations, either with reference to the prerogatives of the Crown, or to the rewards that ought to be conferred on military and naval officers, might give rise. For the prerogatives of the Crown he entertained the highest veneration; and no man was less disposed than he was, to envy those generous persons who had so gallantly fought the battles of their country, the rewards which were so justly bestowed on them. The hon. baronet then entered into a history of the Order of the Bath, from its origin, in the reign of Henry the 4th, down to the time of George 1, when it was restored, and made a completely military order—a measure of which he expressed his disapprobation. At that period, as appeared from 'Clarke's History of Knighthood,' the knights companions were only thirty-six, though they had been afterwards greatly increased. The House, he conceived, ought to look with great jealousy at the recent extension, which only opened the way for a still greater enlargement. By the Charter of the Order each knight was bound to maintain a certain number of efficient men; and, by this means, a power was placed in the hands of the Crown to raise an armed force surreptitiously; since the King could call on every knight to furnish, him with a specific quota. He hoped the papers he should move for would be granted, because they would enable him to show how much at variance the recent extension of the Order was with the principles on which the institution was originally established. He condemned, in strong terms, the almost utter exclusion of the civil classes of society, under the new modification, from participating in the honours of this Order—pointed out the many inconveniences that must result from the alteration of rank which it created in this country—and concluded by moving, "That an humble Address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, that he will be graciously pleased to give directions that there he laid before this House, copies of all letters patent issued by his late majesty King George the 1st, whereby the Order of Knighthood of the Bath was restored and erected into a regular military order, and of all letters patent affecting the same since issued by his said late Majesty, and his successors, kings of these realms, unto the present time, and also of the letters patent, or other instrument, by which the said Order was lately modified and extended."

argued, that it was most advantageous for the public service that the honours objected to by the hon. baronet, should be conferred on our military and naval officers; the events of the late war created, he said, an absolute necessity that some distinguishing marks of approbation should be appropriated to them. All the inconveniences the hon. baronet had stated, as arising, with respect to precedence, from the new modification, would have been equally felt if the expedient of creating our meritorious officers, either knights or baronets, had been resorted to—while the honour would not be distinctly military as it now was. It was wished, that the persons who performed great military services for the country, should be distinctly pointed out to their fellow-citizens; and no mode appeared so proper for that purpose, as that which had been pursued. The idea was by no means new. It was an object to which Mr. Pitt's mind had been earnestly, directed; and towards the close of his life, a very extensive, arrangement was contemplated, to hold out to the country those officers who had signalized them- ] selves. A good guard against the too great extension of the Order was, that if those honours were too profusely granted, they would lose their value. But on the other hand, if they were too few, his Majesty would not have the means of rewarding services. Every precaution had been adopted to guard against any abuse of the Order. Every state of Europe had some Order particularly devoted to the military. Every person knew how eagerly in Austria the Order of Maria Theresa, and in Russia the Order of St. George, were desired by the armies of those countries. He saw nothing in the manner in which the Crown had exercised its prerogative on the present occasion, to invite Parliament to consider it as an abuse. As the other orders of the day were disposed of, he should conclude with moving, that the House do now adjourn.

contended, that in time of peace it was the duty of the Legislature of this country to repress rather than to encourage any attempt to give too great a military character to this country. They had at present an instance in a neighbouring country of a military despotism trampling on the wishes of the people of that country. He complained of the attempt to separate the citizen from the soldier; and objected to the measure as an imitation of foreign manners, of foreign frippery and frivolity. It was only such a constitution of mind as had contrived the late exhibitions in the Parks, that could imagine his piece of frivolity.

defended the extension of the Order as the only fit mode of honouring men who must otherwise have been unrewarded, and whose only object in life, and consolation in death, was honour. It was this which had made the late ruler of France so popular with his army. If other nations had found out that soldiers were pleased with these honours, why should we refuse to avail ourselves of such a mode of rewarding an army merely on that account? He should certainly oppose the motion.

said, that this country was differently circumstanced from those foreign states, where military orders had been found beneficial. Wherever a nation was a military nation, there ought to be military orders; but England was not a military nation. In Russia, maids of honour ranked as major-generals, and the chancellor himself was a field-marshal. Buonaparté had been alluded to, as ren- dering himself popular to the army, by the creation of military orders; but how deplorable were the consequences of his so doing likely to be! This measure, be said, might ultimately be attended with most dangerous consequences to our liberties. It was the first attempt to establish? exclusive military honours. He complained of the inequality with which they had been distributed between the two services. Out of 180 knights, only 49 belonged to the navy. He instanced captain Phillimore as a person who ought not to have been overlooked on such an occasion.

said, that there should have been some better ground shown for objecting to the measure than the circumstance that foreign nations had Orders of a like nature. The order was a reward for past services, and a stimulus to future. Buonaparté had created a vast military power in a great measure by means of orders of a like nature. Would it not be necessary to meet and counteract him by means similar to his own?

said, that these new honours had dissatisfied every body and pleased nobody; they had disgusted those who before belonged to the Order of the Bath, and those who had since entered were ashamed to shew their honours. The measure had revived the jealousy between the two services. Government had been more than just to the army, and done less than justice to the navy. He participated in the feeling of jealousy at the attempt to make this a military country. Was the duke of Wellington bred at a military college? or lord Lynedoch, or sir John Moore? There was not one who had received medals who would not rather continue to wear them, than be adorned with this distinction, which had been diluted almost to nothing. Before the French Revolution, the Cross of St. Louis, being at every button-hole, was not worth 2s. 6d.; and in Portugal the same distinction was worn by upper servants. When we talked of the splendid services of our army, we ought not to forget those men who had swept the seas to make room for that army. The navy was now congenial to the constitution of this country. The army were contented with their medals, and discontented with their badges, and rather ashamed of them.

observed, that it was not the fact that the army had been honoured more than, the navy; the distribution to ] the two services had been made with strict reference to their respective numerical strengths; and on this principle the army had only twenty knights more than the navy.

wished to know how this modification of the old Order of the Bath had been created. Was it in virtue of a notification in the Gazette? In looking at the history of the country, he could see that no change had been effected in that Order, except through the instrumentality of the Great Seal. Then he wished to ascertain in what manner the pleasure of the Crown had in the present instance been executed. Was the duke of Wellington's opinion, he would ask, taken in the selection of the officers for this distinction?—Were navy authorities consulted for their quota? He thought not; for if they had, the omissions which had occurred would never have taken place. The whole formation and arrangement was, he believed, the work of ministers themselves. (Hear.) In his opinion, for some time past there existed a marked partiality to the military service, in preference to the navy. (No, no.) In his opinion there had, and the public thought so. Nothing was more dangerous than this distinction. For the army he entertained the highest respect. He believed them the best in the world. (Hear, hear.) But he also felt that they could not be maintained in their station, except by the proper and firm support of the naval character. The right hon. gentleman concluded by adverting to the illiberal manner in which the new honours had been distributed between the two services.

, in reply to the question of Mr. Ponsonby, as to the manner in which the measure had been produced, said, that the order had been regulated as usual, by patent, and therefore there had been no unjust exercise of the prerogative. The military officers had been selected from those whom lord Wellington had recommended for medals. The only regular way, on the part of the hon. gentleman opposite, would be, not to insinuate that anything improper had been done; but to charge and make a motion. He justified the extent of the Order, on the round that it was found, even in Mr. Pitt's time, that the rewards were not equal to the gratification of deserving claimants.