the prerogative; but he would answer for himfeif, and take this opportunity of declaring, that nothing fhould induce him ever to be the dupe of fecret influence; that to all fuch imputations he would only oppofe his own perfonal character, his integrity, and his confere; and tha: whenever he should be endangered by any influence to which he was not fee in his judgment and his heart to acquiefce, the way was open. It was his duty to retire, and he would. He might be weak, but he trated he should never be mean. Lord J. Caven i was very pointed and fevere on the mode by which the new ministry vere admitted to power. The prerogative of the crown, his lordship obferved, had been la el, more the subject of converfation within thefe few months, than even for thefe lait thty years which he had fat in the houfe. He vindicated the people with whom he acted, and urged with much weight and severity the ne.enity of going immediately into the com The fpeaker having left the chir, the houfe refolved itself into a committee on the ftate of the nation; when the following refolut.ons were moved and put. Firt, That it is the opinion of this committee, that no fums be ifiued from the treasury for a limited time, without the reasons of difbursement being stated, and the objects for which they are refpectively appropriated; and that an account of thefe be laid on the table of the houfe of commons. Second, That an account of all fums iffued from the treasury, from the 19th of December lat to the 12th of January, be laid on the table of the house.. Third, That the fecond reading of the mutiny bill be on the 23d day of February next. The above three motions were made by Mr. Fox, and after fome reasoning and altercation, agreed to without a divifion. Lord Surrey then rofe and ftated, that it might naturally be expected that in a committee of this nature the fyftem of ministerial arrangement and government thould be attended to this the fituation of the nation loudly called for. He therefore moved, that in the prefent ftate of the country it was highly neceffary that an administration should be formed, which possessed the confidence of the public. After fome reafoning on this point, Mr. Dundas rofe to exprefs his furprize at a frange omiffion in the motion. It feemed only framed to fecure the confidence of the public at large, independent of the approbation either of majefty or parliament. To what caufe was this omiffion to be attributed? He wished therefore to remedy it by moving an amendment, that after the word confidence be inferted, of majesty. The amendment was put but negatived without a divifion. The original motion was then carried nem. con. Lord Surrey then moved, that it is the opinion of this committee, that previous to the late arrangement of miniftry, rumours had been industriously propagated, and ways and means used in no respect calculated to conciliate the confidence of pa liament in the prefent adminiftration; and that the facred name of m jety had been intentionally employed and auufed for promoting these measures. The committec, after a long debate, divided on the last question, Ayes Noes Majority against the mininers 196 142 54 The houfe was then refumed, and the motions were feverally reported, and agreed to. Mr. Huffey, chairman of the committee, moved that the mutiny bill be put off till the 23d of February.-Ordered. After the other orders of the day were poftponed, Mr. Chancellor Pitt delivered the meffage from the crown, which stated the reafons of the Heffian troops being landed, and affuring the house that they would be re-embarked. It being then feven o'clock in the morning, the house, after fifteen hours debate, aujourned. JANUARY 16. The Speaker having left the chair, the Houle refolved itfelf into a Committee on the state of the nation. Lord Charles Spencer then rofe, and shortly adverting to the refolutions of the Houfe on Monday, and the particular circumstances of the nation, made the following Motion, viz. "That it is the opinion of this Committee, "that an Adminiftration having come into of"fice under circumftances fo new and extraor"dinary as not to conciliate the confidence of "the Houfe, their continuance in office, after "fo explicit a declaration, is disrespectful to "the Houfe of Cominons, and highly injuri"ous to the intereft of the public." Mr. Baker feconded the Motion. This Motion brought on a very long and unentertaining Debate, confifting chiefly of declamation on Secret Influence, and other popular topics, notwithstanding the attempts of Sir William Dolben and Mr. Powis to reconcile the contending parties, the latter of whom regretted the melancholy ftruggles and divifions which daily prevailed in the Houfe. He wished most devoutly that principles of agreement and coalition might be fome how or other established amongst the oppofing parties. He reprobated the the feverity of the Refolutions of Monday night. He recalled their attention to the natue of these Refolutions; they tended to affect the character of an Adminiftration who were untried in office, and against whom no proof of misconduct had been either adduced or fubftantiated. And at what period, and with how much precipitancy had thefe Refolutions been adopted? Had not they been gone into at fix o'clock in the morning, after a long and fatiguing debate on a previous queftion, in the difcuffion of which the fpirits of the Houfe had been almoft exhaufted? It was at this period that this "deed without a name" was fanctioned and confirmed. Mr. Chancellor Pitt concluded the Debate with a fhout ipsech, in which he faid, that the Motion being of fo perfonal a nature, he did not think it decent for him to enter at length into its merit or to endeavour by argument to ward off the vengeance of the Houfe. He fhould fhortly flate, therefore, what it was that they were about to do. They were to decide on a Minility whom they had not tried. They were to declare them undeferving of their places before they had committed any act even to excite fufpicion. They were to be condemned unheard, unknown, untried, and unconvicted. This was a fort of conviction which he should not confider as a punishment, and he should bear their determination with a mind unmoved. the bank of Edinburgh, by the Duke of Portland, during his adminiftration, for the purpofe of expediting the Motions of the Scotch Members to Parliament. This was precifely the circum tance he had ftated to the House, and he doubted not but it was in their recol lection. Mr. Dalrymple expreffed much regret, that the circum tance which he had ftated to his Hon. friend had occafioned fo much uneasiness. He had been impofed upon during the whole courfe of the bufinefs, or at least had mifunderflood the Hon. Member who had given him his communication on the fubject. He withed therefore to apologize to the House on that ac count. Mr. Charteris declared himfelf ftill diffatiffied, and prefied the Hon. Gentleman who spoke laft to be more explicit. Mr. Dalrymple, upon this, plainly avowed that he was the perfon who had given him the information refpecting the fupposed benevolence that had been extended by the Portland Administration to the Scotch Members. Mr. Charteris recollected that he had overtaken Mr. Dalrymple on his way to London, at the commencement of the prefent session; that he was moving very flowly; that he asked him why he did not get on a little faster; that he afked, in a joke, why he had not petitioned for a share of the money allotted by the Premier, and which, he understood, was in circu The Committee then divided on the Queflation at Edinburgh for the purpose of forward JANUARY 23. Previous to going into the Order of the Day, Mr. Charteris folicited the attention of the Houfe to a tran action, the knowledge of which he had come to through no authentic channel of information. He had been abfent from attending his duty in P. rliment when the above affair happened, and he had only gathered his acco nts of it from the news-papers. It referred to an affertion of his, which he underflood had been quoted in the Houfe, refpecting Minifters ditributing a fum of money, which had been lodged in the bank of Edinburgh for the purpose of forwarding the motions of the Scotch Members to Parliament. He begged to know who had propagated fuch stories, and upon whote authority they refted. He thought himtelt afected by fuch reports, and wished to have them properly explained, or at least to have an opportunity, in perfon, of vindicating limfelf to the Houfe. Mi. York tool up, and flated to the Houfe what had pafied on a former occafion. He had been intermed, by an Hon. Member of that Houfe, that a fum of money had been lodged in ing the Scotch Members. He only threw out thefe things in a joke. He believed they were founded in a fimilar circumstance, and that they originated in a political fquib which had been circulated at Edinburgh. This was the precife statement of the butiness. ORDER OF THE DAY. Mr. Chancellor Pitt moved, that the India bill be read a fecond time and committed. The motion being feconded, Mr. Fox rofe, with an intention to enter into the intrinfic merits of a bill, on the fate of which depended so many and various circumftances of magnitude and importance. Ha wished to confider them difpaffionately, and with the deference and candour which they deferved. He hoped no perfon would fuspect him of prejudice on a point of fo much intereft, and which fo materially affected the political concerns of the nation, and the profperity and happiness of fo vaft a number of the human race. This was no object of trivial concern; no queftion of light difcuffion; no fubject in the investigation of which the fpirit of party thould mingle itself. The evils exifting in the administration and government of India, might be digested under diftinét heads. From the reports of the Secret and Select Committees it appeared, that the company's fervants abroad, by a fecret influence, corrupted and abufed to their purposes the proprietors and directors at home. It was no leis evident that there was no energy, or at least no fufficient vigour in the adminiftration of the company's affairs in this country. And it was equally obvious, that there were no remedies for thofe evils of various defcriptions, which were committed by the fervants of the company abroad. The e (faid he) are the grand and leading points of confideration in the digeftion of a scheme of India reform, and which it was my object to correct in the bill which I formed on the fubject, and which obtained the approbation and fanction of the houle. Let us now compare the bill under conti leration in its various tendencies to correct thele evils, and in is different relations to thele objects. The bill under confideration then, by continuing the influence and power of the propretors and court of directors, by rendering the later dependent on the former, even for its exiftence, by avowedly leaving as much as poffible the commerce of the company to its own fuperintendance, has furely in it no tendency to eradicate thefe evils or to emancipate the company from that flavish dependence on its fervants abroad, which has deprived it of energy and decifion, and rendered it the prostituted object of foreign cabal. It was the intention of my bill to remedy thefe encroachments of to threatening and deftructive a nature, by excluding the proprietors, as far as was confiftent with neceffity, from a participation in a government, in the conduct of which they had exhibited fuch a prostitution of fentiment and fo frange an accommodation of measures to the corrupt influence and fecret intrigues of their fervants abroad. This, however, is by no means the intention of the bill under difcuffion. According to it matters are still allowed to move on in their former track. Directors must fill look to their conflituents, and proprietors may still be decided, not by motives of public utility, not by the fentiments of cool deliberation, but by the fecret influence of perions who perhaps gave them existence. Our Did not daily obfervation and experience illustrate the connection between reprefentative and conflituent bodies? Nowhere is this depeadence more eminently exemplified than in this houfe. Here all of us look to electors. Here all of us with to acccommodate ourfelves to their inclinations, fo far as is agreeable to our principles; and in the event of diffolution, each of us are anxious to conciface the approbation of our conftituents, and even fome of his conftituent, that we may not be difimiffed. This dependence exhibits in the trongest light, the extreme danger of continuing the commercial concerns of the company in the hands of perfons raised to office, and placed under the abfolute controul of men who have uniformly been under the influence and direction of their fervants abroad. Do at recent facts illuftrate this truth, and evidently demonstrate that directors are chofen not in virtue of their own merits, but agreeablet: the prepaffeffions and prejudices of the proprietors? I do not mean to expatiate on the circumftances of a late election, or to develope the various caufes which have raifed an hon. gentleman (Commodore Johnstone) behind me, and others, to the office they now hold in the court of directors. It is fufficient for me to observe, that in determining the judgment of the proprietors in fuch cafes, merit is not always the criterion of dection, but that in proportion as a servant has acted wrong, in proportion as he has forfeite the favour of the company, he has, in the fame proportion, recommended himself to their patronage and regard. Here then is a defeet of tyitem, a corruption in government, a protection of delinquency, which loudly calls for correction and remedy. On the prefent fcheme, however, are not thefe evils rather heightened than destroyed? Another objection to the bill, in my opinion, is, that it iniures no effective mode of obedi ence. It enacts an appointment of officers by one body, and vefts their recall in another. How could fuch a fyftem be rendered either executive or effectual? According to every idea of jurifprudence I have formed, the executive authority in every well regulated government ought to be placed in a fmall body. This was the conftant theme of those who declaimed on the advantages of monarchical government, and their reafonings ought certainly to be admitted, in as far as they were agreeable to the maxims of freedom. Here were, however, two diftinét bodies; a court of directors and fuperintendants, conftituted on different principles, who might be actuated by various motives, who might occafionally be influenced by oppofite-intereits; and yet into the hands of thefe two bodies is to be committed the executive power of adminiftring the affairs of the India company. The one is to have the authority to appint. It is the privilege of the other to recall. In fo divided a government, where can there exift either energy or execution? Founded in principles fo heterogeneous, muft it not be the conftant victim of internal diftraction? But fuppofing there fhould be a cordial agreement eftablished between these two executive bodies, though there fhould even exist a danger of fuch an union amongst them, how dreadful muft their combination be to this country? By whom is the Board of Superintendance to be appointed? Is it not by his Majefty? Is it not to be under his controul? In how dreadful a point of view, then, must the very impposition of an agreement betwees this Houd, and the Court of Directors, trike every one who attends to it? Muit not the existence of fuch an union extend the influence of the Prerogative, by adding to it the patronage of the Company?. 1s it not giving power to the Sovereign for the ends of influence, and for the extension of that fyftem of corruption which had been so juftly rep.obated? How can those, then, who affect to be the enemies of undue influence, the candidates for popular diftinction, ad the affected fiiends of freedom, pretend to fupport a Bill fo dangerous in its tendencies, and fo Lo lile the liberties of the country? in wh..ever point of view, then, I confider the nature of this regulation, 1 muft pronounce it to be unwife and unfafe; for no truths are more obvious than thefe, that when the Courts of Superintendants and Directors are at variance, anarchy will be the effect; when, on the other hand, they are agreed, meatures will be adopted tending to increase the influence of the Crown, and deftructive of the liberties of the fubject. To prevent thefe evils, and to guard againft fuch fluctuation of fyftem, it was propofed in the Bill which received the fanction of this Houfe, that a confitent and permanent government of India affairs should be established in London. On this plan officers were not to be appointed one day, and recalled another. The administration of India was not to be fubjected to change, and become a fhuttlecock of government, fimilar to that which exifts in this country: for what has been the fate of this diftracted kingdom for fome years paft? Look at the revolutions which have taken place within this period. Confider how Miniftry has fluctuated through various fucceffions, occafioned by different caufes, whether of national difafter, or of fecret influence. Look how many changes there have been brought about in the Adminiftration of Ireland, and in the men appointed in the conduct of it. Would not a system, then, conftituted on fimilar principles, be productive of fimilar effects? Would not the appointments of men vary in India, according to the revolutions of politics in this country, and every circumstance, on this principle of the Bill, be rendered unftable and ineffectual? No perfon fetting out to India for the most benevolent purpofes, could either accomplish his wifhes, or fecure his permanency under fo precarious a regulation. But this Bill is by no means calculated to reftrain any of thofe abuses which have exitted fo long, and have been fo loudly complained of. This is another of its cardinal defects. In fo divided a scheme of government, where the management of affairs is vefted in the fame hands as thefe to whom it was formerly com mitted, how can fuch an object be accomplifhed? In whom did the refponfibility of nomination rest? No where. His majefty had the power of appointment toties queties, with out refponfibilty. In fo ftrange a fyftem, how could thofe abufes be rectified, which it was the object of every bill on this fubject to remedy? The bill which I introduced to parliament, placed the refponfibility of appointment and of meafures in India affairs in this houf-there it was fafe. But where does this bill eft it? in his majesty's prerogative, without the circumstances of refponfibility. Does not fuch a mealure give even a legal exten, without cortroul, to the influence of the crown? On the pri ciple of the bill which received your fanction, every thing was to be canvalled with freedum in this houfe. All was refponfibility, openness, and fairnef: but on the prfent cheme, every thing is dalk defign and iccret influence. Is it not its intention to fteal the patronage of the company to the crown? There is another defect which muß ftrike every one who attends to the nature and regujations of this bill. Here it is expressly declared that the civil governor shall be appointed by the company, and the commander in chief by the crown. Could any regulation be more effectually calculated to establish an imperium in imperio, or to produce divifion and difcontent? Is it not the principle of every well regulated fociety that the military government fhall be under the direction of the civil? But how can fo wife a regulation have its effect on the fuppofition that the civil governor is created by one party and the commander in chief by another? Such a regulation was almoft teo weak and obvious to be expofed. To the bill which I propofed to the house it was objected, that it had a tendency to give exiftence to a patronage, and to erect a fourth eftate, fubverfive of the liberties of this country; but let it be remembered to whofe hands this patronage was to be committed, and by whom it was to be exercifed-it was parlia ment-it was this houfe. The prefent bill refts it in hands appointed by the crown, without refponfibility, recallable by the crown under the fame circumstances, and to be exercifed by the crown for the corruption of this houfe. An hon. member (Mr. Chancellor Pitt) has accufed me of being poffeffed of a towering ambition-I think his a fubmiffive one as it feems to lead him to erect a fyftem of mean compliance and fecret fubordination. Whether I therefore view the prefent bill with respect to its intrinfic merits, or in comparifon with the other, which was the bill of this houfe, I can neither approve of its principle or its expediency. It was the object of that bill not to erect a government at Calcutta, but in London; not to give exiftence to a precarious, changeable mode of adminiftraticn, but to establish one ftable and permanent; not to give an improper extenfion to the prerogative of majefty; not to enchant this houfe into an idea of its merits by the charm of the royal name-but to fubject its various regulations to the infpection of parliament-not fcreen culprits from judicial infliction, but bring them to merited punishment:fuch were the principles, the circumstances, and the objects of that bill which obtained the approbation of this house. But though this bill has been rejected, other expedients, perhaps, lefs exceptionable, may furely be devifed. An alloy of jealoufy refpecting it, it has been alledged, influenced the fentiments of the public. I like and ap prove of jealousy in every point of political concern, and in all points of new regulation, which may affect the freedom and happiness of the nation. But though jealousics have exifted, furely proper restraints may be impofed on thofe circumstances which teemed more especially to awaken the fuspicion or the public. Much Much has been faid of the nomination of perfons which had taken place in the former bill. Their character and abilities had been canvaffed with much freedom. He was, how ever, happy to fay, that they were all of them. perfons of wisdom and integrity equal to the important truft repofed in them. The noble earl (Lord Fitzwilliam) on whom the firft charge was to devolve, was a perfon whofe knowledge, whofe abilities, and whofe in duftries rendered him every way capable for fo interesting a charge. There was no perfon he was fure who had the honour of his acquaintance, and who knew his merits, but who would admit the truth of the affertion. The character of another gentleman (Sir H. Fletcher) who was to have been connected with the noble earl in office, had been reflected on in another houfe. Afperfion, however, if unfupported by evidence, is the worit fpecies of invective. Enquiry I know has been made into the foundation of thefe reflexions, and they have been difcovered to be groundless. In this fituation then it furely becomes the noble lord who threw them out to difavow them as openly as he uttered them. He was convinced there was no perfon among the feven who had been appointed by that house, whofe character and abilities were objectionable, and with repect to which he was not prepared to meet enquiry. For thefe reafons I am fully decided against the principle and political regulations of the prefent bill. It tends to no reformation at home, and to no correction of abufe abroad. It tends to remedy none of thofe evils which have exifted for fo long a period, or to put a period to thofe barbarities which have ftigmatized and rendered infamous the character of Britain, and the annals of India. If adopted, the company may fend out their orders to their fervants they may replenish their letters with morals and ethics, but they will be liftened to with indifference and difrefpect. If adopted, I do not hesitate to fay that India is gone, is inrecoverably loft for ever. Gone I am forry to fay, because I am aware, that notwithfanding the magnitude of this truth, notwith#tanding its alarming circumstances, there are fill fome in this houfe who will give it their concurrence and affent. Mr. Powys and Sir William Dolben, with the true fpirit of patriotiim, lamented thofe afperities of language which tended to widen the breach between the late and prefent mirifters; freely blamed what they thought exceptionable in both their bills; and earnestly called on them to unite their abilities to form a miniftry which should give stability and confequence to the country. Mr. Erfkine, in a long and elaborate speech, went over all the arguments adduced by Mr. Fox on the fubject, and feveral other gentlemen spoke in the debate, but without throwing any new light upon it. Mr. Chancellor Pitt rofe and obferved, that he had liftened with all his attenrion to the EUROP. MAG, feveral arguments which had been produced. Thefe had been fufficiently diffusive, often plaufible, and he would not affect to deny, that they were fometimes convincing and fatisfactory. He trufted, however, the fenfe of the house would be with him in opinion, that much ftrong affertion, much general declamation, much circumftantial detail, much partial statement, and fome not very well founded invective had allo mixed infenfibly with that strong tor rent of eloquence, which the right honourable gentleman, who commenced the debate, had poured forth against him. The learned gentleman (Mr. Erskine) had literally followed the line of his great leader, and scorning to burden the fubject with any novelty, repeated his arguments with great fidelity. As, however, the ftrength of the debate certainly refted with him, he should, without meaning any difrefpect to the learned gentleman, chiefly direct what he had to fay to what fell from his right hon. friend. In this refpect, however, he was at fome lofs where to begin, as the right honourable gentleman had affailed almost every part in the bill, and indeed allowed it not to have any merit ex cept the laft fentence, which restricted it to a limited time. He was not, however, altogether without hope, that parliament would give him credit for having done fomething towards a fyftem of regulation, which, after a very fevere and minute fcrutiny he still thought respectable. Notwithstanding all that had been said about controul, he would venture to affert, that the fame objection which lay against his measure, was alfo against that of the right hon. gentleman, as his bill had no claufe for abridging of fuperfeding that of the executive power over every fubordinate authority whatever. He begged gentlemen would therefore attend to this circumftance, and mark how the right hon. gentleman's arguments operated, not less against his own measures than the bill now pending, In this cafe it was obvious all the abuses and inconveniences which had been enumerated with fo much eloquence, invective, and triumph, as refulting from the circumstances of the one, were, in a certain degree, equally applicable to thofe of the other. Though the great outlines of the bill were in his own opinion unexceptionable, most violent indeed had been the conclufions drawn from that check which was given to the executive power of this country; and a feries of very wanton interrogatories had been grafted on this part of the plan, but with what candour the houfe would certainly judge. Surely gentle men were not difpofed to admit all thofe extra vagant conjectures which the honourable gentleman was fo willing to impute to that meafure. He did not by any means think it capable of fuch an excess as was in this manner fuppofed. Nor did he at the fame time think the general maxim a good one, that power would always be thus abufed. The check, however, was calculated to operate for the good of the object to which the afpect of the whole was I directed; |