the public expenditure. This system of endeavouring to make a sudden impression, would not be found very effectual by the hon. and learned gentleman. It was a system pretty well understood both in and out of the House. These five minutes triumphs would produce no effect. He knew that the hon. gentlemen opposite meant to make the present a very active session of parliament on the subject of economy. He applauded them for this intention, for there was no other topic on which they could have any sanguine expectations of distinguishing themselves. But he did recommend to the hon. and learned gentleman to abstain from such tricks as that of this evening. He put it to the hon. and learned gentleman's own taste and judgment, whether he had not eminently failed in all his endeavours to exhibit his dexterity at the expense of his understanding. He hoped therefore that he would in future pursue that direct policy which was so much better suited to his talents and attainments. Mr. Preston contended, that the country was totally exhausted, that the taxes were beyond the abilities of the people to pay them, and that the longer ministers proceeded in their present course the worse it would be. The House then resumed, and leave was given to bring in a bill according to the resolution. Sir Robert Heron said, he had one question more to put to the right hon. gentleman. Had he been well informed, when he was told that the salaries of the Jaw officers of the Crown in Scotland had likewise been increased since the opening of the present session of parliament ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer replied, that the unnecessary and irregular conversation which had followed the answer which he had given to the last question of the hon. baronet, induced him to say that it was not convenient to him to answer the question now proposed. Mr. Tierney said, it was important that the House should come to some understanding upon this subject. He was ready to admit, that there were certain questions, regarding foreign policy and our military arrangements, which it would be impolitic to answer. Here, however, was a simple fact, the answer to which, whether in the negative or affirmative, could produce no ill consequences. The question simply was, "Were the salaries of the Crown law officers in Scotland $ raised or not?" He would be glad to. know what was the objection to this question? Were they to be driven to the necessity of making motions when such information was required? or, were ministers to follow that rule which had, for the convenience of parliament, been so judiciously observed, that of answering all questions which might tend to shorten and simplify public business? If it was determined to force the House to the former course, he would make a motion day by day, and hour by hour, without notice whenever he saw occasion, and he was sure he should be supported by every honest man in the House. Lord Castlereagh said, that if the right hon. gentleman would introduce a little better discipline into his own camp, he would find no objection on the ministerial side of the House, candidly to reply to all proper questions that might be put to them; for it was a practice which he readily admitted, had a great tendency to facilitate public business. If the hon. and learned gentleman opposite had allowed the question and answer of the hon. baronet and his right hon. friend to pass without observation, all would have been amicable and parliamentary, and he might, if he had chosen it, have taken the regular means of raising a discussion on the subject. But when, in a tone of importance, he thought proper to assume (without any foundation in evidence) that his majesty's government were employed not in diminishing but in increasing the public expenditure, he departed from that which was the usage of the House. No doubt the hon. gentlemen opposite were perfectly ready on every occasion to conclude against government without any investigation, but he believed they would find it difficult to persuade the public to think with them. He hoped the right hon. gentleman would rein in his steed a little, and then he would not find any difficulties thrown by his majesty's ministers in the way of information. Mr. Brougham begged leave to remind the noble lord and the House of the actual facts as they had occurred in the committee. A question put by an hon. baronet had drawn from the right hon. gentleman opposite a candid answer, avowing that an augmentation had taken place in the salaries of those officers in Scotland, comprehended in the scope of the inquiry. But the right hon. gentleman had not confined himself to a dry answer. He had given reasons for the augmentation; he had entered into an argument, and had stated to the committee the grounds on which government had proceeded. "The augmentation took place recently," said the right hon. gentleman, "but it was in consequence of representations of an old date, and on the ground of a great increase in the duties of the officers in question." Hearing this, it was impossible for him not to endeavour to expose the fallacy of the statement. But by whom was the argument commenced? Undoubtedly by the right hon. gentleman, who, feeling that the measure which had been adopted required defence, entered on its justification. Then, when his only object was to show the weakness of the right hon. gentleman's defence, up started an hon. gentleman connected with the colonial department of government, and accused him of venting a tirade (as he called it) against the right hon. gentleman himself." Lord Castlereagh said, that in inferring that his majesty's government were employed in increasing and not in diminish mg, the public expenditure, the hon. and learned gentleman had unfairly attempted to create a notion in the public mind, wholly unfounded in its nature. The Speaker observing that there was no question before the House, the conversation dropped. draw a strong picture of the distressed state of the country, particularly in those districts within his own observation. He defied the chancellor of the exchequer to improve it, if instead of one million, he gave twenty to the farmers. Leave was given to bring in the bill. PRIVATELY STEALING BILL.] Sir Samuel Romilly, agreeably to his notice, called the attention of the House to the propriety of repealing the act of the 10th and 11th of William 3, which takes away. the benefit of clergy from persons convicted of stealing privately in a shop to the amount of five shillings. This act, he said, was the most severe and sanguinary on our statute-book, inconsistent with the spirit of the times in which we lived, and repugnant to the law of nature, which had no severer punishment to inflict on the most atrocious of crimes. It was no reason for not repealing, but, on the contrary, the strongest for repealing this act, that it was never executed. There could not be a more pernicious system than that of severe laws and a relaxed execution of them. At the time the act was passed, the crime was extremely prevalent, but the change in the law had not caused it to disappear. Yet it had been at different periods strictly enforced; and in the year 1785, no less than 97 persons were executed for this offence in London alone, and the dreadful spectacle exhibited of twenty suffering at the same time. It was a vast discretion to vest in any men, and although it might be safely confided to twelve judges, selected from the profession for their learning, wisdom, and character, it was sometimes intrusted to others of inferior talents, and whose conduct was less under the constant observation of the public. The hon. and learned Mr. Preston was of opinion, that the gentleman then proceeded to state the object of this bill was to promote as rank number of persons who had been tried a job as ever he had heard of, and that for capital offences of this nature during its direct tendency was, to enlarge the pa- the last five years. Taking the whole tronage of the Crown, which was the ul- together, 161 had been indicted, and only timate source of our misfortunes; perhaps, 41 convicted. This fact was only to be indeed, he would be more correct in say- accounted for from juries being placed ing, that it was a patronage of oligarchy under circumstances which obliged them which caused so many evils to the coun- to depart from the dictates of their own try. This, he said, was a species of pa- consciences. They found the property tronage, which, to use the words of a not to be of the value which they averred relation (with whom, however, in conse-it to be; and cases had occured, in which quence of his tergiversation, he did not boast of his connexion), had increased, was increasing, and ought to be diminished. The hon. gentleman then proceeded to CROWN RENTS BILL.] Mr. Huskisson, after some prefatory observations, in which he stated the object of the measure to be principally an annual collection of the rents, and an annual inspection, in order to ascertain that the tenants were complying with the terms prescribed to them, moved "That leave be given to bring in a bill the better to regulate the Offices of Receivers of the Crown Rents." two persons were indicted for stealing the same property, and only one of them was convicted, because he was an old offender. In a recent case, a person had been in House with these remarks, he should move, "That leave be given to bring in a bill to repeal so much of the act of the 10th and 11th Will. 3, as takes away the benefit of clergy from persons convicted of the offence of stealing privately in shops, money, or goods of the value of five shillings." Leave was given to bring in the bill. dicted for stealing a 101. bank note out of a dwelling-house; but the jury found it to be not of the value of 40s. Now, though bank notes might have been considerably diminished in value, he thought it would be difficult to prove that they had fallen in this proportion. And yet this sort of pia fraus, as it was called, had not only been long in practice, but was even recommended by the bench. Mr. Justice Blackstone had positively declared, that it was a thing proper to be done. He did not speak of that doctrine being held by the learned commentator when he was a mere student at the university, but that it was contained in the last edition of his work, which he himself revised after he was made a judge. But what benefit could the public receive from example, where punishment was never inflicted? He considered it a most serious and alarming fact, that there had been a great increase of offences in London and Westminster between 1806 and 1815. He could hardly read a newspaper without seeing paragraphs descriptive of youthful depravity, of crimes committed by poor, wretched infants, who had been abandoned by their profligate parents. He had lately read, that the recorder had declared it to be the determination of the Prince Regent to execute the next boy who was convicted, in order to give a check to youthful offences. He supposed, however, that this was merely an empty threat, because he could not think such determination could be made, while experienced men received the mercy of the throne. He had no hesitation in saying, that this great increase of crimes was to be attributed to the inferior officers of the police, whose interests were directly at variance with their duty. He had seen it in evidence before the House, that such things actually existed: it was their object, not that petty offenders should be suppressed, but that they should be permitted to go on from crime to crime, till the officers received a large reward for merely doing their duty. He sincerely hoped, however, that the session would not be allowed to pass, without an inquiry into the state of the police. An hon. friend of his (Mr. Bennet) had lately rendered the most important services to the public, by detecting and exposing the scandalous abuses which existed in the prisons of the metropolis; and he trusted, that the same gentleman would immediately turn his mind to this other important subject. Having troubled the HOUSE OF LORDS. Monday, February 19. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESSES IN IRELAND.] The Earl of Limerick, before the House proceeded to the order of the day, was desirous of calling their lordships' attention for a moment to a subject of great importance-he alluded to a petition which he held in his hand from a very considerable district of that part of the united kingdom to which he more especially belonged, stating the great distress which had arisen to the agricultural interests in that quarter. It was a petition agreed to at a county meeting of Limerick, called by the high sheriff. And it was remarkable, that notwithstanding the political and religious differences which prevailed in that country, it formed the only instance in which a petition had been unanimously agreed to all parties, all classes and descriptions of persons agreed to it, notwithstanding all the differences that might subsist either of a political or a religious nature. The petition stated, that every article of agricultural produce had greatly sunk in value; that it had indeed so sunk, that it was almost impossible to obtain any money for it. The butter trade also (a fact of which he was not before aware), which was the great reliance of that country, had been so much depressed in consequence of the facilities given to the introduction of foreign butter, which came unburthened with those taxes and charges to which the home article was subject, that butter which from 1812 to October 1815 had fetched from 5l. 12s. to 5l. 16s. per cwt., had since October fallen to 31. 16s., a depression that caused the most serious evils to the people of that country. The provision trade also had in a great degree failed, which most materially added to the distress. As some remedy for the evils thus produced, the petitioners, who were highly grateful for the patriotic conduct of parliament regarding the corn bill, at the time it was discussed highly unpopular, but which unpopularity had now vanished-ventured to propose, that the import of foreign but- | ter should be subjected to restrictions, so that the holders might not be enabled to undersell the home produce, and that by means of some new regulations the provisions of Ireland, should be admitted into the colonies with greater facility. They also ventured to suggest, that the heavy duty on malt had, in its effects, greatly deteriorated the revenue, whilst it had, at the same time, materially injured the interests of the grower. This duty, they expressed a hope, might be modified, so as to give some relief to the agricultural interest. Whatever might be the opinion of parliament as to the propriety of applying these remedies, he could most confidently state to their lordships, that it was necessary to do something in order to afford relief to the great number of individuals in the county of Limerick who were now deeply distressed. If some remedy was not applied, a great mass of the population must inevitably be thrown out of every sort of employ, an evil, the mischievous consequences of which, he shuddered to contemplate His lordship concluded by presenting the petition, which he moved should be read. The petition having been read, it was ordered to lie on the table. THE TREATIES.] Lord Holland before they proceeded to the order of the day, wished to ask a question of the noble earl opposite, in order to elucidate the subject before them. He observed, in the note presented by the allied ministers to the duke de Richelieu, notifying the appointment of the duke of Wellington to the command of the allied troops in France, it was stated that" the allied sovereigns have nevertheless, in consideration of the high interest which induces them to strengthen the authority of the legitimate sovereign, promised to his most christian majesty to support him with their arms against all revolutionary convulsion. He wished to know to what promise of the allied powers this phrase alluded? The Earl of Liverpool said, it referred to a previous note of the allied ministers, communicating the treaty concluded between this country and the allies to the French government, and not to any specific engagement upon the subject. Lord Holland asked, if he was to understand that the promise alluded to * See p. 261 of the present volume. merely referred to the note mentioned by the noble lord? The Earl of Liverpool replied in the affirmative. ADDRESS UPON THE TREATIES WITH FOREIGN POWERS.] The order of the day being read, The Earl of Liverpool rose. He said, it was now his duty to call their lordships' attention to the treaties which had been laid on their table by command of the Prince Regent; and in so doing, the first circumstance which suggested itself and which, indeed, forced itself upon his notice was, the extraordinary rapidity of the success which had attended the military operations of the late campaign, as well as the complete nature and result of that success. It was only on the 25th of May last that their lordships had addressed the Prince Regent, and promised their aid towards the re-establishment of peace and security in Europe. Their lordships then heard the dismal forebodings and evil prognostications as to the result of the policy which they had thought proper to adopt. In little more than three weeks from that period-on the 18th of June, Europe was a second time delivered on the field of Waterloo. In a few days after Buonaparté was forced to abdicate, and on the 3rd of July Paris capitulated to the duke of Wellington and Prince Blucher. He thought he might safely say, that there was no instance in the history of this or any other country, where, considering the magnitude of the operations and the object, the success was so rapid, and so complete and decisive in its nature. He stated this, because nothing could set in a higher point of view the exalted merits and glorious services of the commander and the troops. But, had he not also a right to say, that the government in such a trying moment had not been wanting in its duty, when, under the circumstances which then existed, it had collected and brought to bear upen the enemy, within so short a time, a body of troops capable of performing such great and important services? And might he not further say, that it was a strong presumption of the soundness of that policy upon which this country had acted, that the power of the adversary, which had been represented as so formidable, was completely overturned by the effect of a single victory? If that power had been rooted in the affections of the people of France, as had been some times and in some quarters asserted, was it to be believed that it would have been so speedily destroyed? tion of lasting peace in Europe, by provi ding for the internal tranquillity of France, with which the peace of Europe was intimately connected. This was the policy then pursued; and if their lordships would carefully advert to what happened afterwards, they must, he was persuaded, be convinced, that the re-action which took place was the consequence of the revolt of the army, and of that only. It certainly could not have been owing to any undue severity in the government, for his firm belief was, that a milder government, under such circumstances, never existed. That there might have been some errors in the government, as there must be in all governments conducted by fallible men, he did not mean to dispute; nor was the circumstance extraordinary. But the ge ness, and a disposition to secure the goodwill of all parties; and the errors, if such there were, arose from that fallibility to which all human operations were subject. This, then, was the first circumstance which must naturally press itself upon the attention of the House-the rapid and complete success which attended the military operations of the campaign. But, before he proceeded further to state the nature of the measures adopted by the allied powers, he must explain the principles upon which they were founded; and with that view he must look a little back, and observe in what situation this country stood with respect to France and the allies, at the time when these operations commenced, and also at the time when the negociations which led to the treaties now before their lordships had begun.neral policy of the government was mildIn 1814, when the allies had entered Paris and the war was finished, the great principle upon which this country and the other allied powers had acted, was that of liberality. The principle of the treaty of Paris in 1814 was that of great liberality towards the French government and the French nation. Many, indeed, thought at the time that this had been carried too far, and in one or two instances this might be true. But, though ill applied in one or two instances, yet he was prepared to contend, that the principle itself was just and wise. The object at that time was, to make the government then established in France satisfactory to all parties, and to take away all pretence for disaffection and revolt. And he could not help looking back upon the policy which had then been followed, with a great deal of satisfaction. If the allies had not acted upon this principle of liberality and confidence towards them, it might have been said, that the hard conditions imposed by this country and the other powers, and the ungenerous advantage taken of the state of France, had occasioned the revolt which afterwards took place. But, by the liberal nature of the policy which had been adopted, all pretences of that description were taken away. The object had been to show every respect to the king of France, and to repose every confidence in him and in the French nation, that was consistent with the repose and security of Europe. The principle was that of rendering the government popular in France, and establishing a state of things in that country the best calculated, as far as could then be seen, to lay the founda He thought it material to mention these particulars, as connected with the situation of France at the time of the landing of Buonaparté in the beginning of March 1815. The effect of that operation was certainly wonderful and unexpected. He had heard it said out of doors, that the success was to be ascribed to this wrong and that error of the French government. But his firm belief was, that the success of Buonaparte's attempt was not owing in the slightest degree to any error of the government of France; it was owing, as he had before stated, to the revolt of the army, and to nothing else. That was the sole cause, and whether the policy of the government was more or less wise, signified nothing as to that circumstance. As to whether any precaution could have been taken, so as to prevent the success of Buonaparte's attempt, he would not now consider. But the fact he took to be perfectly clear, that the success was owing solely to the revolt of the army, together perhaps with the circumstances of surprise which attended the enterprise. When the news of Buonaparte's landing first reached the allied sovereigns at Vienna, the declaration of the 13th of March was published. That declaration, it must be observed, was issued merely on the intelligence of his landing, before they had heard of his success; and this was manifest from the terms of that declaration, which expressed a hope that the French themselves would repel the attempt. The object of it was |