as strong a friend as any man could be to christian toleration, but he believed in no toleration of philosophy.

Mr. Whitbread called on the right hon. gentleman who was a friend to christian toleration, and an admirer of the gospel of Christ, to open that gospel, and show him where he could find the church and state united together, and where he could find, though tithes were created by men, that they were designated by God as the engine of political aggrandizement, or of individual or national oppression? The right honourable gentleman denied philosophical toleration; Socrates was a philosopher, and Christ himself was the greatest philosopher that ever lived. Did the right honourable gentleman recollect that these statutes against popery were the emanations of perjury and lies-just like the cry raised by himself in 1807-just like lord George Gordon's riots in the year 1780-the right honour able gentleman himself being now at the head of that or of a similar mob? Had the right honourable gentleman considered the nature of his militia interchange plans, when he censured his noble friend's (earl Grey's) measure in favour of the catholics? What was lord Howick's measure? The opening of certain situations in the army to the catholic officers. Why, by this interchange you brought ca. tholic soldiers, commanded by catholic officers, to defend these realms!This was lord H.'s measure on a scale ten times more extensive. And was it this then that endangered the church?-Was this the ground on which the cry of No popery was raised-But the mat ter did not rest here. The casualties of the army at the lowest com

putation amounted to 22,000— (would to God they were not more!)-and your ordinary recruiting furnished only 9000-you were forced to have recourse to volunteering from the militia. The catholic soldier would not go with out the catholic officer. The officer therefore must be permitted to go; and here was lord Howick's measure completed. These inconsistencies could be accounted for upon the supposition that on this subject the right honourable gentleman, ingenious, and acute as he was, entertained prejudices so gross, that it was impossible for him to see any thing clearly through their mist. But the right honourable gentleman's intolerance had injured the recruiting. For these three years past, the catholics had not enlisted. The priests had prevented them, and no wonder. Give back then their privileges to the catholics, for they had them before. Give them by degrees; or, if you do not, the time will come when they must be given at once-and that once may be a season of serious convulsion in the state. He concluded by expressing his sincere hope that the day would come when those claims would be considered-and when no such infernal cry of "No popery" would be raised as that which had been excited three years ago.

Mr. Stephen commented in se vere terms upon Mr. Whitbread's sentiments. He declared the toleration which he had panegyrised in France, to be nothing but a mixture of despotism and hypocrisy; but, indeed, he believed that there was no measure of Bonaparte's of which the honourable gentleman would not be the apo logist or advocate. (A loud cry of "Order, take down the words.")' Mr. Whitbread. The words

impute

in a long and laborious inquiry into the conduct of the illustrious personage now appointed commander-in-chief-they would recollect how that inquiry terminated, and the motions which it gave rise to, as well those which were negatived as those which remained upon the journals of that house. It was not his intention now to enter into the merit of the evidence on that occasion-he had only to do with the results. The first address which was moved, was an address to his majesty, accusing the duke of York of personal corruption and connivance. Against the adoption of that address he among others had voted. But though he was ready to acquit his royal highness of personal corruption, still he could not absolve him from several minor charges. He thought he was guilty of a criminal negligence of a something so bordering on connivance, that it was impossible for him to remain with propriety in his situation. Though the necessity of his immediate resignation did not seem to impress itself so strongly on the majority of that house as it did on his mind, still he must contend, that the resolution which they had come to was such as to lead to that resignation. He was not present at the termination of the inquiry, owing to circumstances which he would not then explain; but still he believed himself to be correct in stating, that on the last day a motion had been proposed by an honourable gentleman, the member for Bristol, which, if earried, must have led to the resignation of the duke by the vote of that house. An amendment was how ever moved by a noble friend of his, (lord Althorpe,) namely, "that as his royal highness had then

resigned his office of commanderin chief, it would not be necessary for the house now to go into the further details on this subject."

This amendment, with the exception of the word “now,” was put upon our journals. The house therefore determined not to proceed, merely because his royal highness had previously resigned the command of the army, These were the premises on which the house came to their final, determination; and on those premises he should ground his present motion. In effect, and in words, the resolution was a declaration, that unless the duke of York had resigned, that house must proceed further. This he contended was no forced construction-the mean ing evidently was, that his royal highness should retire. In order then to maintain the dignity of that house, he called on it to protest against the present appoint ment; he called on them as they valued the dignity of that house, the reputation of the government, and the purity of the representation. He entreated them to consider well what they were going to do; to consider whether they would now sanction what parliamentnay, what that very parliament then sitting, had expressed an opinion against. He hoped they would have a due regard for their own dignity, and not suffer in silence such an insult on the house. What! was it to be borne that a retired officer, driven from his situation by his own misconduct, whose resignation was approved by that house was it to be borne, that after only two years absence he should again be brought back into that situation from which his own misconduct had been the cause of his retiring? He called on parliament

not

not to suffer it. If there were men in that house, who for purposes of their own, or from some notions of theory into which he did not mean to inquire, wished to see that house vilified in the public opinion, and saw it passing contradictory votes on the very same subject, no doubt they would be rejoiced to find that not one was found to come forward and rescue its character. He did not mean to assume to himself any great merit, because he should consider himself unworthy to be a member of parlament if he did not do his duty. He knew it would be said that the duke of York had been sufficiently punished already-that his offences were venal and trivial, and such as two years expiation ought to obliterate. He could not agree that a deprivation of office ought to be considered in the light of a punishment; he was ready to allow that even a temporary incapacitation to hold office would be a punishment; and then he would be, at the expiration of the time, as ready as any man to allow that the faults which had caused such incapacitation were obliterated. But he would ask, if the duke of York was unfit for office in March 1809, what had since happened to make his return to it fit? He agreed, that it was very desirable that men in the high station of his royal highness should enjoy character, repu tation, and honour. If this was not the case in the present instance, it was not his fault, but that of his royal highness. It was impossible for him to shut his eyes to the misconduct of that illustrious person; and he must say, if his royal highness now stood in the same light as hehad done in 1809, he was incapable of holding his office. The noble lord concluded by moving,

"that on a deliberate consideration of the circumstances which had led to the retirement of his royal highness the duke of York from the command of the army in 1809, it appears to this house to be highly indecorous and improper in the advisers of his royal highness the prince regent to recommend the re-appointment of his royal highness the duke of York to the office of commander-in-chief."

[At the desire of lord Milton, the several resolutions which had been entered on the journals, immediately preceding and at the termination of the inquiry into his royal highness's conduct, were then read.]

The chancellor of the exchequer would endeavour to bring his answer to what the noble lord had advanced into as narrow a compass as possible. In the first instance he must declare, that, in the opposition which he was about to give to this motion, he did not mean either to screen himself or his colleagues, or shrink in she slightest degree from the responsibility which naturally attached itself to their si tuations. They were, he knew, both legally and constitutionally responsible; but he here wished to go further, and declare, that in this instance they were responsible in fact also. He was the more anxious to do this, because he observed that an attempt had been made (of course he did not mean to insinuate that it was made by the noble lord) to represent ministers as ready to shrink from any responsibility in this case, and declare themselves rather agents than advisers. In the commencement of his speech, the noble lord seemed to think that a doubt had arisen as to the propriety of submitting any appointment to the control of parliament. For his own part, he

never meant to deny that a minister who advised an appointment contrary to the opinion of parliament, or the expressed sense of the country, was fully within the inquiry of parliament, and responsible for his act. He would now proceed to show the circumstances which had immediately preceded the appointment of his royal highness to the command of the army; and when the house was in possession of them, they would be better enabled to judge of its propriety. The house must be aware, that the gallant officer who held the command of the army since the resignation of the duke of York, was an officer not only of long and eminent service, but of advanced age. He had been for half a century in some active situation in the service of his country. On his being attacked with illness in the beginning of the year, he had måde a representation to his royal highness the prince regent, that neither with safety to himself nor justice to the duties of his office could he continue to hold it. To this representation, made most earnestly, and repeated more than once, it was impossible not to attend. The place then thus becoming vacant, the next question which arose, was as to the propriety of the person to be chosen to fill it. From the situation of our army, and our extended scale of operations on the peninsula, it was quite impossible that such an office could be suffered to remain long vacant. Who then ought to be chosen as the successor to sir David Dundas, was the question? From every view which he could take of affairs, he was inclined on every account to fix his choice on his royal highness the duke of York. Whatever might occur to others, still when

he considered his long and tried services--the advantage of which he had been to the army-and when he also considered who were likely to become his competitors, he must say, without any disparagement to those gentlemen who under other circumstances would be very eligible, that he preferred the appointment of his royal highness the duke of York. There was no difference of opinion on this subject; and he certainly could not hesitate, when he considered that his royal highness was particularly qualified; which appeared from his arrangements, all of which were calculated to be of benefit to the service, of advantage to the officer, and of comfort to the soldier ;arrangements too, several of which seemed to be made to prevent many of those practices which it was the object of the inquiry to detect. Under these circumstances, he thought they would disgrace themselves, if, from an apprehension of any motion which either the noble lord or any one else could bring before parliament, they withheld from the public the advantages to be derived from the services of his royal highness. There was not, either, the least reason to suppose that his restoration would be received with any indisposition on the part of the army. He did not mean to infer that their mere choice ought to direct any appointment; though certainly, if ever there was a time when the feeling of the army ought to be made the ground of action, it was the present: but when their feeling was founded on the eminent services of the individual who had excited its then that feeling and the ground of the appointment were the same. Unless, then, there was something in the manner in which the house

had