he would now give notice, that it was the intention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, after his return as a member, to take the earliest opportunity of entering into a general exposition of the financial state of the country, in order to explain to the House those details of reduction and remission which he was satisfied would meet with the warmest approbation. It might not be anticipating too much to add, that a considerable part would apply to a diminution of the assessed taxes. He agreed that it was most desirable to afford relief to the agricultural interest, but he did not concur in the notion that that relief could be afforded by a remission of taxes. To the increasing prosperity of the manufacturing and commercial interests, he looked for the most material improvement. When so much new activity had been given to commerce, when such an increase had taken place in the manufacturing districts, it was impossible that ere long agriculture should not feel the benefit of the change, and in the end recover from its depression.

The same sentiments, in a tone more decidedly liberal, were expressed by Lord Liverpool in the House of Lords. He began by regretting the amendment moved by Lord Stanhope, observing, that agricultural distress, and the state of the currency, might form very proper subjects of a separate motion, but could afford no just ground for disturbing the unanimity of the present occasion. Having dispatched this point, his Lordship proceeded to the strictures made by Lord Lansdowne on foreign policy. Nothing, he conceived, could be more clear and decided than the declaration of principle made in the first paragraph of his Majesty's speech, and in the circular to which it referred, written by his late dear and lamented friend. An universal principle was laid down, in regard to internal interference. The principle

was this that every country was the best judge of the way in which it might be most beneficially governed; that every country was the best judge of the nature of the political institutions which it might most advantageously adopt. His Majesty's government had all along viewed the question of Spain as one perfectly clear, as one on which there could be no doubt of the applicability of the principles which he had been describing; because it was a question exclusively constitutional in Spain, and because what had taken place on the subject in Spain was confined to interests purely Spanish. The Spaniards had not (as in other countries had been done) mixed up extraneous considerations with those in which they were themselves nationally concerned. During the war they had resolved upon certain changes in their constitution, and that constitution, so modified, had been recognized and acknowledged by Great Britain. If that constitution still wanted correction, it was in the power of the Spaniards, and they had the right to correct it, under their lawful sovereign. The Spanish nation were justified in receiving any such corrections with applause. That being the situation of Spain, whatever shades of difference might exist as to the expediency of the interference of foreign nations in any other cases, there was no ground whatever for any interference with the Spaniards. Their conduct had hitherto been, as he sincerely trusted it would continue to be, untainted by those scenes of blood, crime, and violence, which had characterized almost every other revolution on record. It was a question not of justice only, but of expediency. Who could calculate on the consequences which might result to all Europe from any attempt to overthrow the Spanish constitution by force of arms? Under these circumstances, the object of this country should be to preserve itself in a po.

sition in which, without shrinking in the slightest degree from the most unequivocal avowal of its principles, it might yet be enabled to avert the threatened evil, and prevent the occurrence of actual hostility. On that ground it was that he contended, in opposition to the opinion of the noble Marquis, that the use of stronger language in his Majesty's speech, or in the address which his noble friend proposed, would have been unwise. The introduction of such language would have been to throw away an advantage of which much might yet be made; for he had no difficulty in distinctly asserting, that, after all that had passed, the door was not absolutely closed against the possibility of amicable adjustment. He did not mean to say that he was very sanguine on the subject. But there was still a hope, and while any hope remained, it consisted as much with the policy as it did with the dignity of this country, to use such language, and to express itself in such terms, as might not preclude it from any future beneficial interference. With respect to the conduct of this country in the possible situation in which it might be placed, there could be no doubt that every man must feel, that, under our present circumstances, the policy of this country was neutrality. But while he said this, he pro

tested from being supposed for a moment to admit the idea, (come from what quarter it might,) that, if unavoidable circumstances presented no alternative to this country but war or dishonour, it was not in a state to go to war. Still, after the extraordinary efforts which Great Britain had so recently made, and taking into consideration the present state of Europe, it was most desirable, that, if we could do so with regard to justice, with regard to our safety, with regard to our honour, with regard to our engagements with our allies, we should preserve our neutral position.

Lord Ellenborough, who in this session took a decided part against ministers, made a short reply. Without wishing to go at present into any lengthened discussion, he expressed his conviction, that the conduct of his Majesty's government had for a long period not been in unison with the feelings of the people of the country, and that they were not using the means which they ought to use for the preservation of general tranquillity.

There was no attempt made in the House of Commons to bring the question to a vote. In the Lords, Lord Stanhope pertinaciously pushed his amendment, but could obtain for it only the votes of 3 against 62.

THE subject of parliamentary discussion, which, in this session, took full precedence of every other, was that afforded by the aspect of foreign Europe, where a war of vast magnitude, and of a character almost unprecedented, was about to be kindled. The armies of France, under the auspices of the Holy Alliance, were preparing to cross the Pyrenees, to subvert the constitution of Spain, and to re-establish the absolute sway of Ferdinand. This was an object, which excited to the highest pitch the sympathy and emotion of the British public. Not only was the issue calculated immediately, and, in itself, to touch their deepest and most generous feelings; but it appeared then pregnant with mightier events, and with a more general agitation of the European system, than actually ensued from it. The public mind was turned, with an interest peculiarly deep, to the disclosures and debates that were to take place in the British Parliament. They might now hope to trace the thread of the negociations, which had led to this unexpected and terrible result; they would see the course and system upon which the British ministry had acted. The debates which were to follow, drew the eyes, not only of this country, but of all Europe; for since the suppression of free dis

cussion on the continent, this Parliament formed the only tribunal, before which the masters of the world could be arraigned; and where the friends of liberty hoped to see those sentiments freely and boldly produced, which they themselves dared not to utter, even in secret.

The opposition party opened this subject with ardour and confidence, assured of finding, from British feelings and sympathies, an ardent support, which was withheld only by the remains of the most violent among the Anti-jacobin party. Their triumph, as a party, however, was much abated by the frank concurrence of ministers in the same views, and the same judgement; and the proofs which they were prepared to exhibit, that everything possible, as to remonstrance, had been done, to avert the dreaded issue. A few, indeed, were ready to maintain, that Britain ought to have threatened war, and to have made war; but as this was seconded neither by the voice of the nation, nor by the judgment of the more sober and considerate of the opposition members, it made little impression on the House. The ground of conflict was, therefore, reduced to some strictures, either somewhat vague, or somewhat minute, upon the manner in which the negotiations had been

conducted, and upon the tone, which, if assumed, would, it was alleged, have averted war, without either of the above serious alternatives.

In the debates upon the address, the opponents of ministry had, as we observed, with great discretion agreed to waive inquiry, while discussion was still pending, and hopes of a desirable issue entertained. They could not, however, conceal the restlessness and dissatisfaction felt by them under this reluctant forbearance. On the 17th of February, the Marquis of Lansdowne put a question relative to the Austrian loan, which had been announced last Session as in a train of arrangement. It would, he said, at all events, be some satisfaction for the British public to know, that the amount was not likely to be employed on the continent in prosecuting designs now most unwisely and unworthily conducting, and upon the policy of which the sense of the people of this country had been most decidedly and unequivocally expressed. Lord Ellenborough followed up these remarks by observing, that the present was not the period to say whether this or any other pecuniary advance had, or had not, been the means of enabling Europe to rescue itself from the greatest and most detestable tyranny with which nations had ever struggled; but this he felt, and this the country felt, that the advance, whether right or wrong, whether lavishly or not lavishly expended, was very likely, in the way in which matters stood, to incapacitate this country from interfering as she ought, and was bound to interfere, in assisting to save Europe from a tyranny more detestable than any to which she had been previously exposed -a tyranny far more galling and grievous; for, whatever was the character of the former sufferings of the continent, there was something approaching to consolation (if such things were susceptible of any) in the mode of their infliction there was at least some

greatness of character in the genius and gigantic resources which imposed that tyranny; but what was the condition of Europe at present? Nations were exposed to the subjection of those whom they despised-they were consigned to the interference and control of those whose tyranny must on that account be infinitely more galling and detestable, than that with which at other periods it had been their lot to struggle.-Lord Liverpool, without entering into these collateral reflections, merely pointed out the glorious results which had arisen from the application of this loan, and the concomitant exertions made by this country; and he then assured the Noble Marquis, that from the time of the peace to the present, his Majesty's government had evinced the utmost desire to urge upon the Court of Vienna the necessity of entering into an arrangement for the repayment of what he concurred with the Noble Marquis in calling a just debt-an arrangement which was not only due to the fair claim of this country, but also to the Court of Vienna itself. He was happy to say, that the principle of the claim had been recognized by the Austrian government, and also the principle of the arrangement for its liquidation; and in a short time he hoped he should have it in his power to state the particular nature of that arrangement, for the completion of which he had very sanguine hopes.

As time passed on, and every appearance of an amicable issue became more and more faint, the Marquis of Lansdowne determined upon taking another step. On the 25th February, he stated his anxiety to put a question, "whether that hope, whatever may have been its value, which was stated to be entertained by the King's ministers on the first day of the session, that the peace of Western Europe might still be preserved, still continues to exist in the same degree; and if, according to

unfortunate appearances, from which alone individuals can form an opinion,) it does not continue to exist in the same degree, in what degree it does continue to exist; and whether any expectation at all is still entertained by government that a conflict can be avoided, respecting the character of which but one opinion prevails from one end of the kingdom to the other? Upon the answer the Noble Earl may return to this House, will depend what farther questions I may think it necessary to submit, or whether it will be requisite for me to trouble him at all farther."-Lord Liverpool, referring to his former declaration, and anxiety to avoid discussion, now said," I must still deprecate any premature inquiry as to whether matters have or have not yet come to that pass, which makes the preservation of peace absolutely impossible. But I am farther enabled to state on the present occasion, (in addition to those general considerations, and to that general feeling, which I think ought to operate upon the minds of members of the House,) that other especial and peculiar circumstances have occurred since that period, some very recently, which would make me still more strenuously oppose any discussion of the existing relations between France and Spain. I can also mention what will be an additional inducement to silence-that the forbearance Parliament has already shewn as to the discussion of this great and interesting topic, has afforded very material advantage to the British ministry, in the negotiations that have taken place with foreign powers."-Lord Lansdowne expressed general acquiescence in this reply; but at the same time put now another question, "whether, in the course of the negotiations which have preceded recent events between France and Spain, any condition or any understanding has been entered into by Great Britain obligatory upon her with respect to any part she

may take, or any part she may be compelled to abstain from taking, in the approaching conflict, if, unhappily, the threats of France should be carried into execution ?"-Lord Liverpool stated the impossibility, without too extensive disclosures, of returning a distinct and complete answer to the question; but added," I have no difficulty in saying thus much-that this country has entered into no obligation whatever, (nor would the King's government have thought themselves justified in doing so,) to preclude it from following the course of its discretion at any moment, and according to the circumstances, that may affect or threaten its honour, interests, and character." Lord Ellenborough, also acquiescing, added, however," I cannot, and never have been able, since the speech of the King of France, to entertain any notion that the present differences with Spain will be terminated amicably. I deem it likewise right to say, that I must ever think, that in negotiating without the assistance of Parliament, (which the Noble Earl praises as the forbearance of the House,) and without the expressions of the feelings of Parliament, the Noble Earl and his colleagues are committing an error in judgment. Having said thus much, it cannot hereafter be supposed that I have silently acquiesced.'

On the same evening Sir Robert Wilson, on occasion of a petition from part of his constituents, brought before the House the question of the Foreign Enlistment Bill, or that by which British subjects were prohibited from entering into the service of any foreign power. This act, passed at the solicitation of Spain, with a view to prevent her revolted colonies from deriving military aid from Britain, was now to operate against Spain herself, which might otherwise hope to see bands of ardent volunteers enlist in her cause. Sir Robert said,—When the bill for preventing the enlistment