case; for the Carnatic question was one of abuses in general. This was not an inquiry into general abuses, but one into fees actually taken, about which there could be no secret. The right hon. baronet did not state any abuses in any department but in the master's office, and surely the master of that office would not refuse, for his own character's sake, to give evidence on every thing on which he should be examined by the commission. The right hon. baronet seemed to attack the entire body of the magistracy, as if unwilling to give evidence; or why make a law to compel them to give it? On the whole, he saw no necessity whatever for the Bill, and would therefore move the previous question. Mr. W. Smith spoke in favour of the Bill; because it was hardly to be supposed that persons who were parties to those abuses which the commissioners were appointed to detect, who had either committed them, connived at them, or tempted others to commit them, would voluntarily come forward and disclose them. It might be true that the commissioners of 1732 had no such powers; but was that a reason why in 1815 such powers should not be granted if it was found necessary? A strong inducement to concealment on this occasion was voluntary attendance: for a person, who would draw on himself much anger from his superiors in office for giving information in such a case, could not be at all blamed, if his giving information were compulsory. This was a question of mere common sense. If it was necessary to give the commissioners such powers as the Bill required, to obtain information, how could the House refuse them? He, for his part, thought the powers were indispensably necessary, and would therefore vote for the Bill. Sir John Simeon hoped, that the right hon. baronet, in his remarks in a former debate, on the masters in Chancery, did not mean to insinuate, that they committed, individually, any of those offences of office which were now visited by his indignation. He believed, that if the right hon. baronet had known the body of the masters, he would acknowledge them to be most honourable in the discharge of their public duty. Had the right hon. baronet ever known a case, among the many abuses he has learned, where a complaint had been made to the masters and not attended to? He could with confidence defy him to produce it. It could not for a moment be imagined, that any men of liberal feelings could be induced, for a paltry fee, to render their honour suspected, or their characters liable to imputation. He declared, that if on the first motion for this commission he had been present, no motives of false delicacy would have prevented him, as it did his hon. friend opposite (Mr. Stephen), from repelling, with indignation, the slightest breath of suspicion affecting the characters of the body of masters. Mr. Horner did not think the panegyric pronounced upon himself and the other masters of Chancery by the hon. and learned gentleman any answer to the observation of his hon. friend. The House had already resolved that an inquiry should take place; and the only question now to be considered was, whether this inquiry should be effectual, or the intention of the House last session should be frustrated or eluded. Mr. Horner asserted, that according to the information he had received, several officers of these courts had acted in a most unjustifiable manner, by creating of their own authority fees which not only were not authorized by the judges of these courts, but were expressly contrary to an act of parliament. He did not know who the commissioners were that had been appointed in Ireland; but there was an instance in Scotland, where the person named as a commissioner was the very man who had for twenty years acted as the chief officer of the court in which all the abuses complained of had arisen, and been put in continual practice. He thought it very extraordinary that any objection should be made to give the power now required to the commissioners, to summon witnesses to give evidence on oath; because, without such a power, the appointment of commissioners appeared to him to be nugatory. If the right hon. gentleman should succeed in resisting this motion, he had no doubt but that all future endeavours to check the abuses complained of would prove fruitless. The Attorney General said, he must resist the present motion. The commissioners were gentlemen of most approved good character; and if they shewed the smallest dereliction of their duty, they would forfeit that high distinction which their previous conduct had obtained. His hon. and learned friend who spoke last, had complained, that persons had been appointed commissioners to inquire into the due administration of justice which had ever been brought under the consideration of the House. Officers who had been guilty of mal-practices would not be very forward or anxious to give information that might criminate themselves; and if the commissioners had not the power to administer oaths, it was in vain to ex. the abuses of the courts of King's-bench and Chancery, who had held the situations of officers in the former court, and masters in the court of Chancery. This might be the case: yet he would venture to say, that no men stood higher in the estimation of the world than those who had been appointed commissioners; they had invested in them all the powers re-pect such persons would divulge the truth. quisite to enable them to come at the truth. The objections offered by his hon. and learned friend were not available, because they could not, as he had asserted, choose their own time to be examined; and, therefore, could never be considered in the light of volunteers. He had intended to submit to the consideration of the House, that it would be a high misdemeanour to refuse to obey the summons of the commissioners: and who could suppose that any man in a respectable situation would render himself liable to the expenses and punishment of a misdemeanour rather than attend to a summons which called on him to do no more than to discharge a duty which he owed to himself and to society, by telling the truth? The power required to be given was unnecessary; and it was a settled and a sound principle, that the legislature should never exert its powers unnecessarily. It had been said, that the last commission made out for this purpose had continued eight years without producing any desirable effect. That might be, and he had no doubt was, very true; and he could, therefore, safely predict, that if the present commission was not vested with more extensive powers than the other had been, it would continue 18 years, and prove in the end equally inefficacious. Mr. Stephen thought it necessary to say a few words by way of explaining why he had argued against the motion when last before the House, and afterwards voted in favour of it. On hearing the objection made to masters in Chancery being appointed commissioners, he bad expressed his surprise, and pledged himself that if any mal-practices could be shown in their department he would vote for the motion. To his infinite surprise it appeared afterwards, that something of this kind had taken place in a particular department. He had, therefore, acted up to his pledge; and notwithstanding he, at the present moment, thought both practising barristers and masters in Chancery were very fit persons to be commissioners, he would still vote in favour of the present motion. Lord Milton believed there had been abuses in all the courts on the subject of fees, very destructive to the interests of the country, and more particularly so from falling most severely on the lower orders of the people, who had most need of the protection of the legislature. Mr. Abercrombie thought the powers asked for indispensably necessary, as the inquiry would be worse than useless without them, for it would be only putting the country to a great expense without being productive of the least benefit. The commissioners should be armed with summary powers to punish in case of refusal to attend, if it were intended to give any effect to the measure. The action for misdemeanour was so slow in its operation, that it was of little or no use. He therefore thought the Bill indispensably necessary. The hon. and learned gentleman urged many arguments to shew that the commission had not the necessary powers, and added, that if there was to be no method of compelling witnesses to give evidence, the business of the commission would more probably be eighteen rather than eight years before it was completed. So far from there being any harm in giving full powers to the commissioners, he insisted that this was the only means of pre-in venting abuses, and effecting the ends of justice. Mr. Ponsonby said, the present question was one that was the most essential to The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that the question was, as to granting powers to a commission which were not generally granted, even under the great seal. The House divided: For the previous question, 88: Against it, 76: Majority against sir John Newport's motion, 12. TRANSFER OF GENOA.] Mr. Mr. Lambton, bringing forward the motion which he was about to submit to the House, conceived that where the fame and honour of the country were sullied, by any measure of government or their agents, it was as much the duty of an humble individual | brought forward to justify every act of like himself, as of the most prominent violence or rapine) could justify such a member of the House, to stand forward, measure? The best balance of power would and endeavour to call down upon the trans- always be found, by sovereigns, in the action that reprobation which it merited. steady affections of the people to their He now alluded to the late transfer of government. But, however disgraceful Genoa, a transaction the foulness of which many of the measures which Europe had had never been exceeded in the political lately witnessed, to no particular instance history of this country, and which re- had England become such a party as to the mained a blot on the character of the spoliation of Genoa. In April 1814, lord nation. He hoped that ministers would William Bentinck, in a proclamation, told not be permitted, in this case, to follow the people of Genoa that their ancient the course they had all along pursued- government was restored, and that he refusing to answer to any charge exhi- acted on the principles declared by the bited against them in that House, on the allies in the treaty of Paris. The more pretext that the subject could not be dis- just and generous the views professed in cussed till the whole foreign affairs of the that treaty, the more disgraceful the country came under the consideration of avaricious squabbling for territory which parliament. If ministers were in this they had subsequently displayed. Lord manner permitted to continue their si- William Bentinck, in the name of the lence, from a feeling of inability to with- British government, appealed to the nastand the attacks of their opponents, and tional feeling of the Genoese, recalled to if the noble lord at Vienna was to be al- them the days of their ancient prosperity, lowed to decide on the most important and pledged his country to reinstate them interests of the country, without the know- in their former privileges. Was there an ledge of the Cabinet at home, and without English heart which did not beat responthe knowledge of parliament, the func- sive to such a proclamation? Was there a tions of that House were at an end. He man in the country who was not contrusted, however, that if the right hon. vinced that it was most glorious for Enggentleman should persist in this disho- land that the English arms should have nourable silence, that a day would come been so employed? Not employed in acts when the country would no longer be de- of oppression, of plunder, or spoliation, graded by such taciturn ministers. If, in but in restoring an ancient and illustrious private life, he were to charge a man with state to its long-lost rights. Such were a participation in the commission of a the promises held out to the Genoese; crime disgraceful to his honour and his but far different was the execution. In reputation, would it be enough for him to eight months afterwards, when they had turn about and say, he was innocent, but been tantalized with a momentary enjoyhe could not defend himself until the re- ment of their ancient privileges, a manturn of a companion equally implicated date arrived from the degraded and dewith himself? He charged his Majesty's testable Congress of Vienna, annulling all ministers publicly in the face of the that had been done in favour of Genoese House, with having degraded the country freedom, and delivering up that unforin the eyes of the world with having tunate country to the king of Sardinia. abandoned a pledge given to a nation in. This transfer was made by a British provited by them to independence. The dis- clamation, signed by a British officer. graceful measure which he deplored was This was an act, the criminality of which unfortunately no longer pending, but ac- did not attach alone to the noble lord at complished; and he hoped the right hon. Vienna, or the officer whose name appears gentleman would at least have the merit to it, but to the whole of his Majesty's not to add duplicity to injustice, or to en- ministers. In this proclamation general deavour to deny the part which they had Dalrymple informed the people of Genoa taken. that the government appointed by lord William Bentinck had been delivered up into his hands, and that he surrendered it, by command of the Prince Regent of England, to the king of Sardinia. He would ask his Majesty's ministers, did they or did they not avow this order? If they disavowed it, then they ought to de(3 0) The unfortunate Genoese had not only been delivered over, like droves of of cattle, to the king of Sardinia, but they had been so delivered over by England; -England had been the instrument of this oppression. What talismanic shield could defend them under this disgrace? What balance of power (a term always (VOL. XXIX.) liver up general Dalrymple to the conse- | formly been distinguished in his long quences of his conduct. If they avowed opposition, of meeting his adversaries face it, let them come manfully forward and to face, and giving them an opportunity of justify themselves in the eyes of the na- answering for themselves. He hoped he tion, for having falsified the sacred word would not now depart from the practice of England, for having rendered the name which had always hitherto been so much of England for the first time suspected to his honour. He put it to the hon. genamong the nations of Europe. This most tleman and to the House, if it was possible infamous measure was not one of those to look at Genoa as an isolated measure, which ministers could avoid explaining; and unconnected with the proceedings at and it was in vain for them to think they Vienna, which had for their object the could stand acquitted to the country by pacification of the world. When they maintaining a profound silence on this, looked at this Congress, they must not as they had done on so many other sub- expect too much-[a laugh]. He unjects. Such silence was not more dis- derstood the meaning of this laugh, but graceful to themselves than to the country, he would repeat the observation. The who suffered them to be at the head of pacification of the world was beyond the its affairs; and no one who had its honour reach of all human agency. Every man and character at heart, but must regret to must be fully aware of the jarring and see it under the guidance of such ministers. hostile interests of the different powers at He then moved for copies of the procla- the Congress. He trusted, however, that mations addressed to the Genoese by lord the result of the Congress would be a William Bentinck, dated 16th April, 1814, temporary repose to Europe from tyranny and by general Dalrymple dated Dec. and bloodshed-and more than that could 27, 1814; and of copies of the instructions not be expected from it. The annexation sent by his Majesty's government to lord of Genoa and other proceedings, must no William Bentinck, in October, 1811, for doubt be considered as the proceedings of the guidance of his conduct in Italy; of the government; but still he apprehended the correspondence between his Majesty's that a certain latitude must be understood ministers and lord William Bentinck, in to have been given to the noble lord when March, 1814; and of the instructions to he undertook this mission; and the noble the Italians, prisoners of war in this coun- lord himself considered that he had subtry at that period. His object in moving jected himself to a fearful responsibility. for the three last papers, was to shew that He happened to be in the North of Ireland, government had not only guaranteed the at the house of the noble lord's father, people of Genoa from the attempts of the when he first heard of his intention to proFrench, but from all the world beside. ceed to the quarters of the allies. The noble lord sent a letter, informing them of this, in which he stated that he was sensible he was taking on himself a fearful responsibility, but he considered it his duty not to shrink from it-he knew the generosity of the people of England, and their readiness to make allowance for the difficulties in which he was placed [Hear!]. A day would soon arrive, when the noble lord would be able to give an account of his conduct; when he hoped that the whole of his conduct would not only be creditable to the people of England, but satisfactory to the House and the nation; and he could not help thinking that the House would be of opinion that it was proper to suspend the discussion till the affair, in toto, could come before them. He should therefore move, That the House proceed to the other orders of the day. The Chancellor of the Exchequer and colonel Wood rose at the same instant, but the former gave way. Colonel Wood then stated, that being nearly connected with the noble lord, whose conduct had been that night accused, he hoped the House would indulge him in offering himself a few minutes to their attention. He wished to suggest to the hon. mover, that on more mature consideration, he would see the unfairness of prematurely discussing a measure in the absence of the individual who was responsible for it, when he could not by any possibility be here to answer for himself. He addressed himself also in a particular manner to an hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Whitbread), who had cheered the gentleman who spoke last, in the hope that he would consent to postpone for a few days the discussion of this subject. In acting otherwise, he would be departing from the conduct for which he had uni The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that no apology was necessary on the part of the hon. gentleman who had brought for the breach of a public promise to a people | their independence, but the restoration of cease to be perfidy, or that there may be their ancient government; she therefore a political interest which may justify per-declared more strongly than any other fidy. They must choose between an ab-power, that she continued to acknowledge surd and an abominable proposition. her ancient friend and co-estate in the commonwealth of Europe, the republic of Genoa, as still of right existing. It is therefore, I think, evident, that neither the parties accused nor the public interest can suffer from immediate discussion. A very short review of the circumstances will shew how much the public honour must suffer from delay. The charge is founded on a crime already completed, and which contains in itself multiplied breaches of faith. Besides these separate and early pledges of each of the allied powers, there is a recent and collective pledge given by them all in the treaty of Chaumont on the 1st of March, 1814, of which the object was declared to be "a general peace, under the protection of which the rights The first pledge given by the allied and liberties of all nations may be estapowers, that they would respect Genoese blished and secured." By what sophistry independence, was the declaration of M. are the Genoese people excluded from Novozilzoff on the part of Russia, on the this protection, thus sacredly covenanted? 16th of July, 1805. That gentleman had How have they forfeited their claim to a been sent to mediate between Great Bri- restoration thus promised to all states! tain and France at the request of Great Are they not a nation? Is a republic Britain. On his journey to Paris, he learned which has flourished for 800 years not a at Berlin the incorporation of Genoa with nation? Is that people not eminently deFrance there the mediation stopped. In serving the name of a nation, which has his note addressed to M. Hardenberg, he shewed as many proofs of national spirit declared, that after such an act as the as any in Europe; which had expelled violation of the independence of Genoa, all foreign invaders more often, and, after negociation must be vain, and all media- longer periods of bondage than any other; tion dishonourable. Genoa filled up the who three times expelled the French after measure of Napoleon's crimes. The em-long possession; who braved a bombardperor of Russia was willing to mediate ment by Louis 14th in the zenith of his after the death of the duke d'Enghien, power; and whose scarcely armed populace after the assumption of the imperial dig-drove out a brave and disciplined Austrian nity, after the incorporation of Pied- garrison from their capital? mont, after the armed mediation which reduced Switzerland to a province, after the annexation of Lombardy under the name of the kingdom of Italy. But the subversion of the independence of Genoa exhausted his patience. He could no longer hold intercourse with its author, even to obtain peace for a friend. How sacredly must the faith of this great prince seem to have been pledged to the people of Genoa! How implicitly must they have believed, that he would not suffer an act to be repeated which he had thus re-dition of obtaining her friendship; they sented as the most enormous of political crimes! Austria has no less distinctly pledged her separate faith to this unhappy people. In September, 1805, she alleged the usurpation of their territory by France as a substantive cause of war. England had given a still earlier, and, if possible, a stronger separate pledge than either of her great allies. At the negociations of Amiens she refused to recognize the French usurpation, then called the Ligurian Republic-she declared, that she could consider nothing as a proof of But all these solemn declarations are not sufficient. England had pledged her faith to Genoa, in a more detailed and minute form, and for that reason, I presume, she was selected as the principal actor in the breach of that faith. When lord William Bentinck appeared before Genoa, the people hailed him as their deliverer; they considered their restoration to their an cient independence as secured. They hastened to do that which Great Britain had required of them in 1802, as the con re-established their ancient government, with such reforms as the lapse of time and the liberal opinions of the age demanded; they engrafted liberty upon legitimate authority; they founded a reformed government upon the solid basis of ancient institutions. Lord William Bentinck, instructed by his own just opinions and generous sentiments, instructed by the acts of the British goverment in 1802, instructed by the recent and solemn declaration of assembled Europe at Chaumont; sufficiently authorized by these |