1

brought forward under the present circumstances on an 'ex parte statement, it would have been a most gross and unwarrantable proceeding. The right hon. gentleman opposite (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) deserved great credit for the part he had taken on the occasion, which alone had weight, as the merits of the case had no share in inducing the hon. gentleman to put off the business.

Mr. Jeffery then proceeded to state, as heads of his charge, that Lord St. Vincent had been first lord of the admiralty in February, 1801, and had continued in that office three years, during which period he had neglected to keep the ships of the navy, which he had received in good condition, in any good state of repair; and that he had not laid down the ships which he had himself ordered, and for a very good reason, for want of artificers, which he had wantonly discharged, and for want of timber, of which he had provided no sufficient supply; that he had neither built any ships, nor repaired-

Mr. Kinnaird here rose to order, without imputing any blame to the hon. member, but thinking that his proceeding would tend to that partial statement which his right hon. friend (Mr. Tierney) had deprecated.

The Speaker decided, that the hon. member was perfectly in order, whilst stating the heads of his charge, without argument, pursuant to the request of another hon. member.

Mr. Jeffery continued, that Lord St. Vincent, up to the last month previous to the war, had neglected the navy altogether, and then placed the different ships in ordinary, at a far heavier expence than if they had been regularly kept in repair. These were the heads of his charge.

Mr. Tierney wished to know whether it was any part of the charge that Lord St. Vincent had not built ships in the merchants' yards.

Mr. Jeffery replied, that the charge was, that he had neither built them in the king's yards, nor in the merchants' yards.

Mr. Wilberforce thought it would be desirable that the hon. member should state more distinctly the heads of his charge the next day.

Admiral Markam understood the nature of the charge now, and was of opinion that any further statement might lead to irregular discussion.

After a few words from Sir Wm. Elford, the motion of Sir A. S. Hamond was agreed to.

Mr. Rose obtained leave to bring in a bill for the better

3 X 2

regulatiuo

regulation of pilots for piloting vessels navigating the British

seas.

An humble address was ordered to his majesty on the motion of Mr. Kinnaird, that his majesty would be graciously pleased to give directions, that there be laid before the house copies of any reports that may have been laid before his r jesty by the commissioners appointed for regulating the civil affairs of the navy. The address was ordered to be presented by such members as are of his majesty's privy council.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer moved the order of the day for the third reading of the university advowson bill.

After a short discussion, in which Mr. Fellowes, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Pole Carew, and Lord Euston took a part, the bill was read a third time and passed.

DUKE OF ATHOL.

Mr. Wi berforce rose to make his promised motion for the appointment of commissioners to inquire into the claims of the Duke of Athol on the Isle of Man. The hon. gentleman entered into a detail of the circumstances attending the sale of the royalties of the island to the British government, and of the subsequent proceedings, which we shall abstain from repeating. In order that the subject might be set at rest for ever, he moved, that an humble address be presented to his majesty, beseeching him that he would be graciously pleased to appoint commissioners, to inquire into the claims and allegations of the Duke of Athol relative to the Isle of Man; and on a full consideration of all the circumstances of the transaction, to report what compensation, if any, it may be proper to allow his grace, and the heirs of the seventh Earl of Derby, in consequence of any detriment they may have sustained from the sale of that island to the crown.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer observed that he had heard little else that night than a recapitulation of former arguments on the subject. One point, however, he thought worthy of notice, that was the supposition of the entire voluntary concurrence of the Duke of Athol to the original agreement about the disposal of his rights in the Isle of Man. It must be recollected that an over rigorous measure had been adopted by that house in order to terrify that noble duke; that he was not unlike a person who capitulated on terms. Was it then surprising that he should have been rather glad to give up a part than face the danger which then threatened the whole of his revenue? The present duke now came to appeal to the liberality

liberality of the house, and that house would certainly not think of pleading a statute of limitations to their liberality; they would not think of ordering that any precise sum should be ascertained and proved as if it were in a court of law; they would not think of guiding their conduct by formal rules or precedents, as if they had to tax a bill of costs. But they would give with a liberality worthy of the great object which was submitted to them, and becoming the honour and liberal character of parliament.

Mr. Windham expressed some degree of surprise at hearing the right hon. gentleman now bring this matter of compensation forward as an appeal to the liberality of the house. After so much discussion, the subject was now brought into the region of sentiment. He did not like to talk much of sentiment in so thin a house; but he would say, that according to the most strict and literal meaning of the word as applied by some of the best writers in our language, he considered this transaction to be neither more nor less than directly, plainly and palpably a job.

Mr. Sheridan declared, that he had supported the claims of the noble duke, because he had thought him to be an injured and oppressed man, in the same manner as he had been known on former occasions to have given his support to others who might be supposed to be in a more helpless situation. But in fact one principal reason why he voted for compensation being given to the noble duke was, because he considered that we, having great power, had made a bargain with a man who was utterly helpless. The honourable member then took a comprehensive view of the various debates, public opinions, and private letters on the subject, from all of which he maintained that it was evident the Duke of Athol would have gained more by regulation in his revenues than he ever did by any illicit trade; that the transaction alluded to, the sale of his right, was matter of regret to him for the remainder of his life, and that some of the most eminent men had at the time thought that the subject ought to be reconsidered. He therefore was of opinion that the present was an appeal to the manly liberality (putting aside all idea of the flimsy word sentiment), to the dignity and the honourable character of the house.

Mr. Curwen denied that his Grace of Athol had the ability to increase the fair revenues of the island to the extent, or in the manner which had been supposed, and supported the motion for inquiry.

Lord Temple spoke also in favour of the motion. He de

nied that the opinion of a noble relative of his (Lord Grenville) was favourable to the claims of the noble duke.

Mir. Barham adverted to an expression which had fallen from a right hon. gentleman opposite him (Mr. Windham), and said that he would be equally justified in his application of the word job; he might with equal propriety say that all opposition to further compensation was a job.

Sir William Elford was of opinion that a fair appeal was made, not only to the liberality but to the justice of the house. Mr. Bankes supported the motion, as there did not appear to him to be any facts before the house upon which it could be enabled to form a correct judgment on the case. It was, of all others, a case that most particularly called for inquiry; and the most proper way to do that would be by the appointment of commissioners.

Mr. W. Smith spoke in favour of the motion.

Mr. Graham stated, that the Duke of Athol would consider this as the final settlement of his claims. He would be satisfied with the decision of the house, whatever it might be. Sir W. Burroughs opposed the motion.

Mr. Wilberforce replied; after which the house dividedAyes 23-Noes 61-Majority 38.

The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the house adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

TUESDAY, JULY 2.

The royal assent was notified by commission to several public and private bills. Among the former were the Irish civil list bill, the land tax consolidated bill, Mr. Pitt's indemnity bill, &c. The commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, Lord Ellenborough, and Lord Walsingham.

Several bills were brought up from the commons and read a first time.

Counsel were heard on the third reading of the Pancras poor bill. After counsel had withdrawn, a conversation ensued upon the principle and consequences of the bill, between Lord Suffolk, Lord Holland, and the Bishop of St. Asaph, who opposed; and the Duke of Montrose, the Earl of Westmorland, and Lord Walsingham, who supported the bill, when the house divided

Contents 17-Non-contents 5-Majority for the bill 12.

On

On the motion that Lord Stanhope's trustee bill be committed, some conversation arose between his lordship and the lord chancellor, when another division took place

Contents 2-Non-contents 8-Majority against the bill 6. Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

TUESDAY, JULY, 2.

On the motion of Mr. Wigram, a new writ was ordered for the borough of New Ross, in Ireland, in the room of Charles Tottenham, Esq. who had accepted the office of escheator of Munster.

In pursuance of a message from their lordships, the Speaker attended in the house of lords, and on his return informed the commons, that he had heard the royal assent given by commission to the Irish civil list bill, the land tax redemption bill, the Irish import and export regulation bill, the coasting seamen's bill, the woollen manufacturers penalty suspension bill, and the poor clergy bill.

Mr. Alexander brought up the report of the committee on the Townleian collection bill; the amendments were agreed to, and the bill was ordered to be read a third time the next day.

A message from the lords acquainted the house, that their lordships had agreed to the stipendiary curates bill with several amendments, to which they desired the concurrence of the house.

Colonel Stanley moved the third reading of the Duke of Athol's compensation bill. Mr. Creevey, Lord Temple, Mr. Calcraft, Mr. Wilberforce, and Mr. Fellowes declared their sentiments in opposition to the bill. Mr. Sheridan, Colonel Stanley, and Lord De Blaquiere defended it. A division ensued,

For the third reading 42-Against it 12.-Majority 30. The bill was then read a third time, and, after an amendment unsuccessfully proposed by Mr. Johnstone, passed.

Mr. Whitbread brought in a bill indemnifying all persons giving evidence in the case of Lord Melville, from any penalties to which they might otherwise be subject for acts, committed by them under that noble lord, during the time he held the treasurership of the navy. The bill was read a first time. On the motion that it be read a second time,

Sir