the amazing success which accompanied the Bill of the right hon. gentleman, which was to have removed all the objections that were urged against his proscribed Bill. He wondered that the gentlemen on the other side of the House did not act as wisely with respect to the American war, and consign it to oblivion, equally with a Bill which was once as much an object of censure as the American war. Prudence should have taught them to do the one, as well as the other.

The motion for going into the committee was then carried without a division.

ad exclaimed, Heaven forbid that he hould be a minister, he made little doubt ɔut that, were he one, he might have much business to do with him, if he pleased. His answer to the question was short; he nad been twice a minister, it was true; but the first time was a period of war, and consequently nothing could be drawn from his conduct at that time, applicable to a question about calling out the militia in time of peace; the second time he was in office, he remained there about nine months only, so that he had not had time to shew what his plan respecting the militia might have been; but, had he remained three months longer in office, possibly he might Debate on a Motion for a Call of the have thought it proper to call out the mili- House.] Feb. 13. Mr. Vyner wished to tia; and as it might have been done within trespass, during a short time, upon the year, there was no ground for saying to the attention of the House, whilst he a certainty that he would not have done it briefly stated his reasons for a motion had he continued a year in office. But which he flattered himself would pass thus much was certain, that he would have without objection, as it was merely calcudepended greatly upon the opinion of pro-lated to oblige them to do their duty as fessional men, in forming a decided opi- members of parliament. Previous to his nion on that head; nor would he have putting any motion into the hands of the been so inops consilii, as not to have been Speaker, he would state the reasons which able to find men of proper talents to ad- induced him to bring it forward. The vise with; and after having taken their Chancellor of the Exchequer had, with a counsels, he would soon have become em- degree of candour which did him great powered to make up his mind: but the honour, given a specific notice, that when right hon. gentleman had already received the ordnance estimates were to be taken the best advice from some of the ablest into consideration, it was intended that militia officers, and yet had not made up they should at the same time determine his mind on the subject. When the Ame- upon the great question of dock-yard forricam war became again the threadbare tification. The question Mr. Vyner desubject, he was really surprised that gen-clared to be, in his opinion, a question of tlemen on the other side should be so imprudent as not to suffer that business to sleep; for if any one of them touched upon it, and ventured to condemn that war, he was sure to find at his elbow another ready to defend it. The enemies of that war would find in council, at dinner, at all the public boards, among their friends and associates, persons who would stand forward strenuously to defend the justice of that war; and, among others, a right hon. gentleman (Mr. Jenkinson) high in the confidence of the minister, who was still a member of that House, but who, if report could be depended upon, would shortly leave it, in order to grace another assembly. It had formerly been the practice of the other side of the House not to let any opportunity slip to attack him (Mr. Fox) upon a measure (the East India Bill) as much condemned as the American war; but he perceived, that of late, that Bill had the good fortune to pass unnoticed; probably on account of

infinite magnitude; it led to considerations of the most serious consequence, and, perhaps, might go the extreme length of effecting a change in the government of the country; it was in all regards necessary, therefore, that the discussion of such a subject should come on before as full a House as could possibly be convened. The regular way of obtaining a full attendance, was by moving a call of the House; and as he meant to move a call with a view to the procuring a full attendance, he hoped the right hon. gentleman would agree to separate that question from the other, and let it lie over for the consideration of the House after the call had operated effectually. He had no wish to delay the public business an hour, but was ready to vote the ordnance estimates forthwith. All he asked was, that before the question respecting the fortification of the dock-yards was considered, the call might be allowed to take place; because, in his mind, it was due to their consti

t sufficiently superior to be trusted to lely. In that case, he should think it ould be wiser to vote the 50,000l. in aestion towards strengthening our navy, an towards the fortifications proposed. le certainly would vote for the motion; and it should be carried, he hoped it would e effectually enforced, because calls of e House, as generally executed, were, his mind, the greatest farces imaginble.

Mr. Vyner begged to assure the House hat he would not have made the motion, xcept from the fullest conviction, that he matter was of the first moment, and hat it could not be too deliberately conidered. He hoped, therefore, it would e agreed to. No circumstance upon earth ut a sense of duty should have induced im to make the motion.

The House divided: Yeas, 54; Noes, 00.

tended to have put into his Bill an extension of what was called the Lords Act to debtors, to a limited amount; but as there was a Bill now pending in the other House, in which that very purpose was achieved, he had not interfered with it. In conclusion, he moved, "for leave to bring in a Bill to prevent frivolous and vexatious suits in the Ecclesiastical Courts, and for the more easy recovery of small Tithes."Leave was given to bring in a Bill.

Complaint that a List of Members to serve on the East India Judicature had been delivered at the Door of the House.] Feb. 15. Mr. Sheridan complained that a List of Members to be that day balloted to serve on the Judicature to try Indian Delinquents, had been delivered at the door of the House.

Feb. 16. Mr. Sheridan begged leave to assure the House that it was very far from Bill to prevent Frivolous Suits in Eccle- his intention to trespass upon their pa iastical Courts.] Mr. Bastard rose and tience with some remarks which now he emarked, that no matter stood more in deemed it necessary to make, if, on the eed of regulation and reform, than the preceding day, some hon. gentlemen, in ractice of the Ecclesiastical Courts, in a the service of Administration, had not inariety of different species of legal process sinuated, with an air of triumph over him nd prosecution. On the present occa- for his supposed defection, that, with reion, however, he did not mean to take up proachful inconsistency, he had first stated he time of the House by entering into a a motion to the House, and then suddenly etail of all the arbitrary, severe, and un- deserted it, without having previously purust effects which had arisen in conse- sued it to any opening whatsoever. If quence of the practices in question; be- gentlemen would honour him with their ause, he not only knew his own limited attention, he felt persuaded that he should bilities, but would not wish to shock the totally exonerate himself from all charges eelings of the House, by stating to them of inconsistency. When he came down he degree of oppression which they had, yesterday to the House, he perceived, and or a series of years, suffered to exist in not without astonishment, the door-keeper he country. He would content himself putting into the hands of every member a with moving for leave to bring in a Bill, paper containing a written list of the and barely hint the objects to which that names of gentlemen by way of a balloting Bill would be directed. The first went to The first went to list; and having the strongest grounds for he abolition of the practice of prosecuting belief that these papers were prepared at or anti-nuptial fornication as it stood at the Treasury, and that it was by their dipresent. In order to prove that this point rection the door-keeper delivered them, required immediate regulation, Mr. Bastard and feeling that such conduct was a direct stated two or three cases, in which the and scandalous attack upon the privileges parties had been prosecuted with great ap- of that House, and conceiving, likewise, pearance of oppression; one in particular, that it was most shamefully indecent on The case of a man who had a suit com- the part of Administration, and that it flatly menced against him in the ecclesiastical contradicted the affectation of impartiality court for anti-nuptial fornication six or with which the Bill was fraught, in respect seven years after his wife had been dead. to the mode of constituting the court of Another object of this Bill, was to put a judicature, he had risen and stated his stop to all prosecutions for small tithes in intention of proving the fact by moving, the Ecclesiastical court, and in the court "that the door-keeper be called to the of Exchequer, and to put them on a foot- bar of the House," which motion he was ing more fit to be adopted. He had in-proceeding to ground upon argument,

H

cature, by Treasury interference. flattered himself that he should not again hear the ridiculous argument that there was no compulsion used, and that the papers left the minds of the members as free and unbiassed as they were before they saw them. [Mr. Pitt said, across the House, So they did.'] Mr. Sheridan declared his extreme surprise at the right hon. gentleman's still contending for so

when he had been called down from the chair-very properly called down, he was ready to admit, on the part of the Speaker, who had been reminded that two hundred members were present, and desired to lock the door and proceed to the ballot, in compliance with the act of parliament which authorized the institution of the court of judicature. This having proved the case, and the ballot having been actually proceeded upon, was there any in-palpable an absurdity; he said, he had consistency in his not afterwards attempting to make his motion? One reason upon which he meant to have rested it, and one object to which he intended to have pointed it, tended to shew the necessity and propriety of postponing the ballot to another day. Mr. Sheridan strenuously contended, that it would have been most absurd in him to have attempted to have made his motion, when so essential an end aimed at by it as the getting the ballot postponed was determined and over by the ballot having taken place. That was an explanation of his conduct of the preceding day, and he left it to the House to decide whether it was at all inconsistent or contradictory. He complained of the minister's having taken an unfair advantage of the letter of the act of parliament in calling to the Speaker to shut the doors when he did. He admitted that, according to the letter of the act, such conduct was warranted; but under such a strict enforcement of the letter of the act, the minister might, when the House were in a division, and one hundred members (those in the opposition) out in the lobby, and two hundred (all the friends of the minister) within the House, call to the chair to lock the doors, and proceed to ballot with a complete certainty of carrying the election his own way. What could be more gross and preposterous than the minister's conduct of the preceding day, when he prevented him from opening his motion, by calling to the chair to have the doors shut while he was on his legs? What he meant now to move, would be that part of his yesterday's purpose, which might be usefully accomplished, and this was; "That the door-keeper be called to the bar of the House, there to state from whom he received the written lists, and by whose authority he delivered them to the members as they entered. The fact was an infringement of the privileges of the House, and an indecent and direct attempt to influence members in their capacity Mr. Francis seconding the mction, of electors of the new court of judi- | added, that he had not attended the ballot,

imagined even the shortest time for recol. lection would have convinced the right hon. gentleman, that the position was truly ridiculous; and, that although Mr. Pearson had not taken the members individually by the shoulders, and forced them by manual strength to ballot for the list which he had put into their hands, yet, certainly, by thrusting the Treasury list into their hands, he had not left their minds as completely free and uninfluenced as they had been before. The Bill affected great impartiality on the part of the minister; and it had been argued at the time the Bill was in progress, that it was intended, that the minister for the time being should not interfere in the election of the new court of judicature in any way whatever. How could this be reconcile to the conduct adopted? A conduct a once so indecent and so degrading to the that if the right hon. gentleman dared ta rise and avow, that the lists were prepare by his orders, and delivered by his autho-: rity, he would pledge himself to move the severest censure of that House upon the right hon. gentleman. And, indeed, it was the duty of the House to institute an inquiry, in order to ascertain what he had stated as matter highly culpable on the part of the Treasury; and the House could take no means so effectual of doing that, as by ordering their door-keeper to the bar. He desired not to be misunderstood as meaning to cast any sort of slur on the characters whose names were in the written lists; more respectable characters he knew not, and so far was he from wishing it to be conceived that he intended to throw any imputation upon them, that he was not without hopes that they would feel that he was combating their cause, and would all vote with him. With these impressions, he should move, "That Mr. Joseph Pearson, door-keeper, be now called in to the bar to be examined in relation to the said complaint."

as he had uniformly professed himself but without a shadow of proof, trench adverse to the constitution of a court of upon? Supposing even that it were true, judicature so unconstitutional in its origin that the written lists had been prepared and principle, and so inimical to the and delivered as the hon. gentleman had "natural rights of British subjects. Upon asserted, where was the breach of privithe face of the matter, it struck him that lege? And as to the idea, that the minds the election had been partially conducted, of gentlemen were liable to be influenced, and that an inquiry was necessary. This upon having a written list of names put served to confirm his former suspicions of into their hands to do what they pleased the extreme unjustifiableness of the insti- with, unaccompanied by any request or tution, and that the tribunal was meant to any compulsion to vote for any one name be thrust forward as a rod of ministerial in the list, that something more than insipower, to fall heavy on those whose opi- nuation (for the hon. gentleman had that nions led them to take an adverse part day invented a new shade of assertion) against Administration, but to be lightly was too insulting to the House to be tohandled, with respect to others, who might lerated a moment. But would any man conduct themselves in a manner more imagine that the hon. gentleman or his accommodating to the wishes and wills of friends had, in serious truth, any concern the powers in being. for that impartiality in the constitution of the court of judicature, for which they were now so eager to profess themselves the advocates, when their conduct on the day of the ballot was considered? It was in the power of forty of them, by staying and doing their duty by balloting, to have put any name upon the list and had it returned; for, with such attention to a fair and impartial election of the court had the Act been framed, that it was so worded, that no minister had it in his power to prevent any name from being put upon the list that forty members chose to ballot for. Instead, however, of the hon. gentleman and his friends taking this fair and becoming mode of insuring a return of impartial characters, according to their ideas of impartial characters, they had deserted their duty and abandoned the ballot. It was evident, therefore, that the attempt so made to raise a clamour, was merely an attempt to throw impediments in the way of public business, and to create alarm in the minds of the people, by illfounded and frivolous complaints. Of the gentlemen who balloted he could observe, without dread of contradiction, that their characters were too spotless either to need praise or shrink from censure.

Sir Joseph Maubey remarked that the motion was needless, and that all the arguments urged in support of it were rather insulting to the House, as they went upon the supposition, that part of it was liable to undue influence, when proceeding to exercise its capacity of electors of the new court of judicature. For his own part, he by no means wished to inquire from whom the door-keeper received the papers he delivered; they had not influenced him, nor did he believe they had influenced any gentleman who balloted. They might just as well proceed to inquire by whom all the various papers, put into their hands from time to time in the course of the session came, such as petitions for bills and other things; an investigation which (to give it the gentlest term) must be a shameful trespass upon the valuable moments of the House.

Mr. Pitt expressed his wishes that a complaint of so frivolous and idle a nature would not occasion much debate on a day when, agreeably to notice, other great and important topics were to be taken under consideration. The two heads of an assertion into which the hon. gentleman had divided his charge, first, that the written lists having been delivered was a violation of the privileges of the House, and next that it stood forward as an instance of the minister's having attempted to interfere in an election vested in the members of that House, by Treasury influence, were each of them so obviously ill-founded and delusive, that they scarcely merited a serious answer. In respect to the supposed breach of privilege, there had been none. For what specific privilege of the House did the fact assumed in argument, [VOL. XXV.]

|

Mr. Fox said, that he could not without equal indignation and surprise observe those very persons who had, night after night, in nearly all their speeches, when he was in office, and conducting his India Bill through the House, attacked him, and charged him with having given himself the nomination of the persons who were to act under the Bill, when he rose up as Secretary of State, and suggested their names for the election of the House, [3 Y]