those English officers who had entered into the military service of foreign states. The House must be aware, that a regulation, founded on an act of parliament which passed a few years ago, still existed, which placed those individuals in a most extraordinary situation. Many of those assert most distinctly that not one sous of French money had been expended upon those fortifications. It might be satisfactory to state further, that, in December, a distinct application had been made to the French government for a disclosure of its views with regard to Spain. The answer was, that it was in-officers, at the termination of the war, tended to reduce the army of occupation finding their "occupation gone," and to 22,000 men, continuing an extra corps being actuated by a strong love for a on foot in the country until the month of military life, as well as by a powerful April. He had every reason to believe feeling in favour of those sentiments of that an extra corps had either been ac- liberty which they had imbibed in their tually withdrawn, or was in a course of native country, had embraced an honourbeing withdrawn. With regard to the able service amongst the troops of those period when it might be expected that countries that were struggling for freethe remaining 22,000 men would be re- dom, and were, in consequence, by the moved from the Spanish territory, he provisions of the bill to which he had doubted if even the French government alluded, subject to very considerable could yet give a satisfactory answer to injury and inconvenience. In making the question. He firmly believed, that the this observation, he did not mean to call learned gentleman could not be more in question the policy of the bill to which anxious for the evacuation of Spain by he had referred, because, at the time when the French army than the French govern- it passed, great jealousy existed with rement were for that event. Individually, hespect to the conduct of this country as to could honestly and conscientiously de- the establishment of those new states. clare, that he was under no degree of Reproaches were cast upon this country, doubt or apprehension on the subject. by Spain and France, in consequence of the part which a liberal policy induced it SOUTH AMERICA-FOREIGN ENLIST to pursue. It had been strongly urged MENT BILL.] Mr. Baring said, he rose that the battle of independence, which was for the purpose of asking a question re- at that period fighting, and which had ullating to a matter of considerable import-timately proved successful, had, in a great ance. A treaty between this country and one of the newly recognized states of South America had been laid on the table. But, it was a remarkable fact, that a most honourable person, an individual of the most deserving description, who had been regularly accredited from one of these states, had not been presented to his majesty. It was rumoured, that this circum-served, was not to enable the Crown to stance arose from the interference of recal officers from foreign service, but it certain foreign powers, who were anxious gave to every paltry informer the right to that the recognition of the South call before a justice of the peace, any American states should be of a mitigated officer who had taken a commission under description. Now, he wished to know a foreign state. If the power existed, as from the right hon. gentleman whether he believed it did, in the Crown, to use this omission was merely accidental, or its discretion in the recal or disqualificawhether it was, as rumour had stated, in- tion of officers, why should this additional tentional. A treaty had been laid on the power be suffered to exist? The law to table; but, the minister of the country to which he referred imposed a degradation which it related had not been received at-imposed a very severe punishmentcourt. He made this application without the slightest interference of the person to whom it related. While he was on his legs, he wished to ask another question, which was of considerable interest as it affected the feelings of a most gallant and meritori ous class of people he meant VOL. XIII. measure been carried on by this country. This, certainly, was made a matter of complaint; and though, abstractedly, he did not think that the law then enacted was strictly justifiable, still, looking to all the circumstances, and considering the time, he would not quarrel with the policy in which it originated. The bill, it should be ob on persons who might contravene its provisions; and yet, there was not a gentleman who heard him, who must not view with the highest respect the conduct of those individuals, and who must not esteem them, on account of the noble motives by which they were actuated 5 B [hear]. It was quite clear, that the bill had been introduced, not from any personal motives, but on principles of public policy. The state of things which had given rise to it having, however, passed away England having recognized the independence of several of those statesit was, he conceived, proper, that the law should be altered [hear]. Subjects of this country had, in periods of peace, held high commands in the French service. We had supplied admirals to Russia, and officers of various descriptions to Austria, Spain, and Portugal. In his opinion, it was of great importance to the military power of this country, that English officers should, in times of peace, be enabled to keep up their military knowledge, by entering into the service of foreign states. He knew that, at the present moment, France was pursuing this system. That country was pushing her military officers into every possible kind of service. They were employed in Greece, in Turkey, in every situation where their abilities were likely to be matured. The French pursued this course, on, as he conceived, the wisest and best of all policy. He had submitted these few observations, merely for the consideration of his majesty's government, and he trusted they would remedy the evil to which he had called their attention. If they did not, he would in the next session (and he did not mention the matter in the way of threat) make a motion on the subject. President of the BOARD OF TRADE.] Mr. Baring wished to put another question to the right hon. gentleman, touching a subject which he had mentioned in the earlier part of the session. A suggestion had been made by him, and in that he was glad to find a concurrence in the feelings of gentlemen on every side of the House, that the services of a right hon. gentleman at the head of a certain department, to whose labours the country had been so much indebted; he meant the president of the Board of Trade (Mr. Huskisson), had not been sufficiently rewarded by the public [hear, hear]. The accidental absence of that right hon. gentleman afforded him an opportunity of recurring to the subject, which delicacy to him would have forbidden in his presence; but now that he had the opportunity, he would take upon himself to say, that there was a general feeling of regret, that that individual should be slaving as he was, in the service of the public, without any adequate reward. This he stated sincerely as his opinion, and without any concert or communication with the right hon. gentleman in question. What he wished to know of the right hon. Secretary was, whether government had turned its attention to the subject? Mr. Secretary Peel replied, that he had not heard the subject formally mentioned, but the justness of the hon. member's observations was so apparent, and the hardship of expecting a man to discharge the Mr. Secretary Peel said, he was ex- arduous duties of a laborious office, withtremely sorry that the hon. gentleman out adequate and direct compensation, had put his questions during the absence was so manifest, that he had no hesitation of his right hon. friend (Mr. Canning). He in saying it was a subject worthy of concould not state the circumstances which sideration. The remuneration of the prehad prevented Mr. Lempriere from being sident of the Board of Trade, whose 'dupresented to his majesty, but he could ties were many and arduous, ought not to assure the hon. gentleman that the course be given indirectly. He thought there hitherto pursued by his majesty's govern- could be no objection in placing that ment was not, and would not be, in the office, in performing the duties of which slightest respect, altered by the inter- the individual sacrificed almost the whole ference of other powers. With respect of his time, on a different footing. Into the other point, he thought it was stead of that, however, his right hon. friend perfectly fair that his majesty should have was placed in another office (treasurer of the power of preventing the enlistment of the navy) to which a salary was attached. British officers in the service of foreign His right hon. friend stood in this situastates, and he did not think that the right tion: he filled two offices, in one of which to punish them which was given by the he had little to do, but was paid for it; act referred to, was at all improper. It while in the other he was entirely occuwas quite clear, that they had not suffered pied, but without any remuneration at all. much under the law; for, he believed, not There was no doubt but that the mode of a single instance had occurred in which requiting such services, should be amend the power of laying an information had ed. been acted on. HOUSE OF LORDS. Monday, July 4. - STATE OF IRELAND CATHOLIC QUESTION.] The Earl of Harrowby laid on the table a copy of the Report of the Committee on the State of Ireland. The Earl of Darnley said, he could not suffer the report to be laid on the table, or the session to close, without some observations. As a member of the committee he had concurred in the Report; for it certainly contained many useful suggestions, on several of the minor points of the inquiry. On the great and important subject, however, which he must always consider paramount to every other, and without a settlement of which all other attempts to ameliorate the condition of Ireland would be ineffectual, the committee had abstained from offering any opinion. In that also he had acquiesced, from a conviction that the members of the committee could never come to any agreement on the subject. He must, however, take that opportunity to repeat the opinion which every day's experience more and more confirmed, that, sooner or later, the claims of the Roman Catholics must be conceded, and that without a settlement of that question, Ireland never could be permanently tranquil, prosperous, or happy. He deeply lamented the rejection of the bill lately sent up by the Commons, and could not help expressing his surprise and regret, to see the noble earl at the head of the government assume, on that occasion, a more decided tone of opposition to the measure than he had ever before manifested; and he was the more astonished by the noble earl's speech, from his knowledge of the attention which had been paid by that noble lord to the evidence given before the committee. Let not the noble earl suppose, however, that his opinion, or the decision of the House itself, had put the question at rest. A popular cry had been raised in England; and, as far as England only was concerned, the question might be supposed set at rest but, far different was the case in Ireland, the part of the empire most interested in the decision. In that country, so far from the question having been set at rest, it was becoming, not so much a Catholic, as a national question. The Protestants of Ireland were impressed with a daily increasing conviction, that they were, if possible, more interested in the settlement of it, than the Catholics themselves. The Earl of Liverpool said, that though it was irregular to refer to the sources in which his opinion was to be found, if the noble earl did refer to them he would find that he had not expressed a stronger opinion this session on the Catholic question than on former occasions. With respect to any recommendation on the subject to which the noble lord had alluded from the committee, it would have been contrary to all practice. The business of the committee was to report information. COMBINATION OF WORKMEN BILL.] On the order of the day for going into a committee on this bill, In The Marquis of Lansdown said, he had several petitions to present against the bill. He expressed his regret, that the House should be called upon, within two days of the prorogation, to pass a bill which was of so important a nature. addition to this precipitation into which they were driven, their lordships were not sure that the information necessary to enable them to come to a proper decision was on the table of the House. Under these circumstances, it was with great reluctance that he gave his assent to the measure. The petitions he had to present prayed that counsel might be heard against the bill; and, if there were time, it would be their lordships' duty to accede to this prayer. The Earl of Liverpool thought there was sufficient time for any discussion which could be necessary. The measure arose almost entirely out of the bill of last session, which had been hastily passed. He had not been aware of its extent, and did not, until it came into operation, know its provisions. There were, as their lordships knew, many old statutes for the regulation of labour, which had an injurious influence on trade. Had the bill been confined to the repeal of those statutes, it would have been a very proper measure. But what did it do? It, at one sweep, repealed the whole of the common law respecting the relations of master and servant. Soon after it passed, disturbances and acts of violence took place in different parts of the country; and it became absolutely necessary to pass some act on the subject before the session closed. Though brought in at a very late period of the session, he had no difficulty in saying, that he considered it indispensably necessary. Even if there were defects in the measure, the allowing them to pass could not be compared with the mischief which would | follow if the law were left in its present state. This bill not only prevented the combination of workmen against masters, and of masters against workmen, but prevented the combination of workmen against workmen. This was a protection which the honest and good workman had a right to expect. The bill repealed the act of last session; but, in doing so, it also repealed the old restrictive statutes which were repealed by that act, while it restored the common law to its former state. Objection had been made to the clause for protecting workmen which contained the word "molestation," but that was a word well known to the law, and would have a fair interpretation. The present bill allowed an appeal from the decisions of magistrates to the quarter sessions. The Marquis of Lansdown agreed, that some measure of this kind was necessary, and more particularly that it was necessary to protect the workmen against themselves. He wished every facility to be given both to masters and workmen to consult about the rise or fall of wages; but it was obvious, that no manufacture could be carried on, if workmen could dictate to the masters who should be employed, and prevent men from exercising their right of labouring on whatever terms they might please. This was what never could be tolerated in a free country. Such a practice never could be sanctioned by law; and what the legislature would not be authorized to do, surely ought not to be allowed to be done by individuals. If the interference of workmen with each other were permitted to go on, trade would be forced from one place to another, until it would at last be driven out of the country. However, if any body of persons should, after the bill had passed, continue to think themselves aggrieved by it, he should next session vote for their being heard by counsel against the act. The Earl of Rosslyn concurred in the necessity of protecting workmen from the effect of combinations among themselves. The bill passed the committee without amendment, and was reported. The standing order being dispensed with, it was read a third time and passed. COUNTRY BANKS.] Earl Grosvenor said, he could not allow the session to close without calling the attention of their lordships to a subject of great importance. He alluded to the liability of country banks to pay their notes in gold. As the law was at present, the summary process which formerly might issue against bankers was abolished: and, as the subject was one which would create great anxiety, he thought it would be advisable to pass a short act, even during the present session, restoring the summary process. The Earl of Liverpool said, that the holders of notes had a better remedy than could be given by any new act, in the law and the practice of banking credit as it now stood. There could be no doubt that country bankers were bound to pay in the current coin of the realm; and the responsibility of not doing so threatened consequences to a banking establishment of good credit, much more weighty than a new act of parliament could enforce. Lord Clifden complained of the conduct of the Bank of Ireland, which paid its notes in guineas, instead of sovereigns, in order to discourage the demand for gold. The guineas were not current at present; and those who received them were at a loss how to dispose of them. HOUSE OF LORDS. UNITARIANS.] The Marquis of Lansdown rose to present a petition most respectably signed, praying, that their lordships would institute an inquiry into the state of the law relating to Unitarians. He expressed his astonishment, that it should still be wished to exclude the petitioners from the benefits of the constitution, without there being on record any case in which their competence to discharge the duties of good subjects could be questioned; and the more so, as the objection to them was founded on inferences drawn from scattered judgments and the words of old acts of parliament, without any proof that the opinions of those persons were of a nature to sanction such exclusion-without its being even pretended that they did not believe in a future state and the doctrine of rewards and punishments. It was scarcely credible that, while it was not pretended that the petitioners held any opinion inconsistent with the safety of the state, they should, now, several years after an act bad been passed for their protection, be told that they were still liable to the penalties which it was the object of that statute to repeal. Yet the lord chancellor had ex pressed a doubt whether those persons, for the relief of whom the statute was passed, were now protected by it. Doubts such as he had described having been entertained, the Unitarians now approached their lordships with a petition, to which their lordships were bound to give their most serious attention. They prayed, that they might be informed what their situation really was; that they might know on what conditions they owed allegiance as subjects of the realm. They requested to know whether their interests were not to be protected, and their safety ensured, in the same manner as if they were members of any other religion. If he were asked, whether he would, in another session, originate any bill to remove the doubts to which he had alluded, he should say, that, looking to the necessity of relieving those persons from the practical grievances of which they had to complain, and more particularly from those they experienced under the marriage act, and to the necessity also of relieving the Church of England from a disagreeable duty-looking, likewise, to the disposition of parliament, if not to pass a law in the same form as the bill of the present session, yet one which might accomplish the same object, he should be disposed, on the part of the petitioners, to accept the passing of such an act as an assurance of the removal of those doubts. The Lord Chancellor said, that if the law turned out to be as it was supposed to be, he would rather pass a law for the benefit of those persons than otherwise. When the question of what the law was, came to be regularly discussed, he would state the grounds of his opinion respecting it. Lord Holland observed, that the learned lord seemed to have forgotten that he had already twice spoken upon this subject in the course of the present session. He would not venture to say, that the learned lord had stated what the law was; but he had stated, that it was such as ought to induce the House to pause before they passed an act for the relief of the Unftarians on the subject of marriage. The petitioners had taken the only manly course which they could adopt; and if the learned lord had followed the same example, he would have stated what really was the law, and not left it to be understood that he still believed them liable to be punished under the common law. This was a subject which called for inquiry, as it involved the interests of that great portion of the community which consisted of Dissenters; for the doubts thrown out did not affect the Unitarians alone, but every description of persons who did not belong to the established church. It appeared, from the opinion of chief justice Foster and lord Mansfield-an opinion to which Blackstone seemed to assent-that the whole dissenting body in this country existed by sufferance that they were all liable to be indicted-that their institutions, for the purposes of charity or education, all stood on a sandy foundation, and might be swept away by a process at law. However, on the late discussion of the Catholic question, those who approved most of this interpretation of the law, were in the habit of using many kind expressions towards the Dissenters. These persons were then called "our Protestant brethren," in the same way as Hotspur had been called "Gentle Harry Percy," and "kind cousin." He durst not follow up the quotation and say the devil take such cozeners." But, the spirit of kindness with which the Dissenters were to be treated, was plainly shown a few days after, when a part of that body came forward to ask of parliament a small boon, which many of the dignitaries of the church, to their honour, declared was not merely a boon to the petitioners, but to the clergy of the establishment also. As soon as the bill came to be discussed, up jumped a person and said, "Who are you? I have found out an act of parliament which proclaims you to be guilty of a detestable crime." This supposed application of the law to Unitarians was founded on the maxim; 1st, that Christianity is part and parcel of the law of England; and next, that to deny the Trinity is to deny Christianity. As to the first of these points, he could not help being surprised to find upon what slender grounds it was founded. What was the meaning of this maxim? If lord Raymond and justice Holt said, that Christianity was part and parcel of the law of the land, and if lord Mansfield said, in language more precise, that revealed religion was not to be reviled, and that to revile it was punishable, it followed that if these phrases were legal terms, they must have a legal meaning attached to them. Was it the holy scriptures which constituted the Christianity which was said to be part and parcel of the law? If so, then no persons who built their faith |