solutely belong to him. He would suppose, that during the war the minister had come into the house, and after stating the necessity of the case, had called upon the country gentlemen to give up a certain portion of their property to the exigencies of the state: must they not, in that case, have absolutely parted with a portion of it? and if at that time others advanced for them that capital which they had not in an immediately tangible shape, was it not right that the capital so advanced should now be repaid to them? He was not demanding for the stockholder more than he was entitled to receive; he was merely demanding that in a compact, such as he had described, the terms should be fairly and honourably fulfilled towards him. These were all the observations which he should obtrude at present upon the house on a future occasion he should explain the reasons why he thought that the alteration produced in the value of money by the restoration of the currency had been greatly over-stated; and then he should endeavour to show, that if proper measures had been taken at the time of the passing of Mr. Peel's bill, the resumption of cash payments would have produced no effect whatsoever on the price of corn and other agricultural produce.

Mr. W. Peel stated, in a few words his intention of voting against the proposition of the honourable and learned gentleman.

Mr. Brougham replied, at some length. Upon the division there appeared, For the previous question, 212.-Against it 108.-Majority for ministers, 108.

House of Lords, Feb. 13.-The marquis of Bath presented a peti

tion from certain proprietors of land in the vale of Taunton, and its vicinity, praying for relief under the present depressed state of agriculture. The petition was laid on the table.

House of Commons.-Several petitions were presented on the subject of agricultural distress, which were laid on the table and ordered to be printed.

Mr. Ald. Wood presented a petition from Thomas Flannigan, of Sligo, complaining of having been the victim of an Irish jury.

Various accounts and papers were moved for by Mr. Hume and other members, and ordered.

Sir R. Wilson rose pursuant to his notice. He said, if the question were merely a personal one, deeply as he felt he had been outraged and aggrieved, he should have submitted in silence; but as the safety of all the people of England was involved in the question, he could not shrink from his duty. He considered this as the happiest moment of his life, for now he could confront his adversaries. He had in vain solicited to be brought to trial; his adversaries had shrunk from the contest. He now appeared there in the commons of England, the vaunted sanctuary of freedom, to demand justice against secret councils and clandestine prosecution and condemnation. He would not enter into the question of prerogative, but if it were as the ministers contended, it was dangerous for all bad purposes, and useless for all good objects. At all events the question he was prepared to meet would not touchupon the prerogative. He knew there were times when it was said the law originated with kings; but the revolution of 1688, had admo

nished judges, councillors, and even kings, that prerogative could not be exerted to inflict wrong on the subject; and what had been done? An officer had been dismissed after 29 years' service, and all he had done proved to originate in malignant political feeling. What had he done? He had opposed the ministers, because he thought their measures led to violent government. He believed them to be wrong; he believed their measures to be fatal; and he had therefore opposed them. Was it on this account they had confiscated his property? Was it hoped to deprive him of those pecuniary advantages which would compel him to resign his seat and take refuge in a foreign land? After former favours from the king, was it expected that this blow should destroy him? If he were guilty, the army and the country ought to know what was his guilt. After all his services, his campaigns; after having fought the battles of his country, would that house endure that he should experience such treatment? If it were allowed, he should view it as the precursor of a reign of terror, which must end in military control. He therefore impressed the case more strongly on the house. He had applied to the several departments for justice, but in vain; he only found that perjury was to be protected by the rules of office. He should now enter upon the case; but he had only to attack shadows. On the 9th of August he was in Paris, and at night he learned from the British ambassador the demise of the queen. He mentioned this because he was said to have been at the time with 30 French officers, and made certain exclamations.

He arrived in town on the 13th of August, and went to Brandenburgh house, but was too late to meet the executors; and during the whole time he had no intercourse with any persons except those of her majesty's establishment. He mentioned this because it was said that he was at a clandestine meeting at Hammersmith, convened for the purpose of obstructing the funeral. At Brandenburgh house they were not sure that the funeral would take place next day. He afterwards went to see Mr. Hume, at Freemasons'tavern, for information; but he did not attend the meeting, for he had no information respecting the funeral to impart. He then went to Brooke's, and did not leave till eleven at night; but none of the executors had any positive information about the funeral. At six in the morning he left London, on a small chesnut horse belonging to Ald. Wood; he mentioned this because he knew it to be part of the ministers' accurate information, that he appeared mounted on a tall black horse. He then went to Brandenburgh house, to hear Dr. Lushington's protest. The funeral afterwards took place. At Kensington there was a halt. He remained at his station for some time, and it was then said that the people were blocking up the road. A baggage waggon was unnecessarily detained; he went and explained the circumstances, and the waggon was allowed to go on. The party afterwards moved on, a

statement having been made that the funeral was intended to proceed through the city; but to his surprise, after going through the park gate it was turned into the park. At Cumberland gate some contest arose. After two or three skirmishes

he

be moved forward. He was advised not to do so; he said he might assist in restoring the peace, and he therefore went on. The hearse was surrounded by the blues but the horse-guards were,in a different situation; there was firing, and it was continued, when it tended to a breach of the peace, instead of the preservation of the peace. He asked them if they had received orders to fire-they said no, but they had been irritated. He said, for God's sake cease. They continued firing. He implored them to cease. He said you were at Waterloo; you have had cannon shot sent at you; do not disgrace the glories you gained on that day. So calm was he, that he did not even use an oath. When he saw a magistrate, he spoke of what happened; and he conjured that person to remain by the officer. The magistrate made a remark, that justified the feelings he had shown. He did not wish to become an accuser, he only wanted to defend himself. Major Oakes was there, but said, he had given no orders to fire. He ought to have mentioned that the men appeared sensible of his rebuke; for they at last observed, let us put up our pistols, and form. As to the attack and provocation, there was, as far as he observed, a very partial throwing of stones He made every effort then and afterwards to preserve the peace. He afterwards took his station behind the mourning coaches, and never left that station till he arrived at Ilford. He then went to his own house. He mentioned this because it was, he believed, stated to the government that he had dined with a gentleman, and had drunk a vulgar, if not a treasonable toast.

He afterwards heard all sorts of defamatory reports-that he was to be hanged, drawn, and quartered; that he would be tried by a court martial; that he was to be dismissed the army, &c. He called at the duke of York's office, noticing the calumnious reports, and stating that he was at any time ready to meet them. Not receiving any intimation, he went to Paris, Sept. 5, as portions of his family were left there. On the 19th, he received a note from Sir C. Stuart; but before calling, he saw in a French paper, an extract from the Courier, noticing in the very language of the duke, his dismission from the army. He afterwards received the duke of York's letter from Sir C. Stuart. In two lines and a half he was informed that his services were not wanted. Thus in two lines and a half had he been plundered of his property-he would use no other expressionand endeavoured to be degraded. It was also endeavoured to fix a stain on his character. He then made every effort to get a court martial; he waived the benefits of all difficulties that might prevent a trial.-Eventually the duke said he was authorised to state, that no steps would be adopted. He applied to lord Sidmouth for copies of the evidence about the Hammersmith meeting; and to Sir R. Birnie, who stated, that next day such information was found to be false. It was also said, that he appeared with a porter-pot in his hand, encouraging the populace to offer obstructions-but that deposition was refused. He then read the correspondence between himself and major Oakes; he next detailed a short correspondence

that

in the public expenditure and reduction in taxation. This petition was also laid on the table.

House of Lords, Feb. 15.The earl of Ashburnham presented a petition from the gentry, clergy, and freeholders of the Rape of Hastings, in the county of Sussex,. for relief under agricultural distress. The petitioners stated, that agricultural distress had reached an alarming extent, so much so, that landlords were without rent, and the clergy without tithes; they therefore prayed parliament to adopt such measures for their relief, as their wisdom might suggest. The petition was read and laid on the table. House of Commons, Feb. 15.Lord Londonderry having moved that the house take into consideration the king's speech, it was read by the clerk. His lordship then rose, and adverted to the importance of the object which he was now about to detail. He never felt greater anxiety; for all the interests of the community were involved in the decision which the house was now about to come to. He should bring his statements within as narrow a compass as possible. If he differed widely from a learned gentleman (Mr. Brougham,) he thought there would be no difference on any important practical points. He had no hesitation in saying, that it was the bounden duty of government and the house to enforce all possible relief and reduction. After emerging from such gigantic contests, the country had not been able to make new strides, and to take fresh dimensions of prosperity; but the house could not fail to recollect what struggles the country had had to overcome. Whatever might have 1822.

been former distresses, at least the country was not now a starved nation.

Before he came to the distresses of agriculture, it might be well to observe that the iron trade was the only one seriously affected. There was one indisputable fact, that the mass of starvation had been removed; it had been removed in a great degree (by the operation of those natural causes, which the house might rest assured were the most powerful aids to remove the difficulties complained of. The workmen now got twelve-pence where they before got eight-pence, and they could now obtain for eight-penee what before twelve-pence. This was an important fact. As to the state of agriculture, its interests must stand or fall with those of other classes. The learned gentleman had adduced the diminution of the consumption of malt, as proof of the difficulties of the country.

cost

posi

He had consulted the papers; he did not find such diminution, as compared with recent years, or 1792. The same was the case with tea; and what was remarkable, the consumption had been less when the duty was least. He did not mention this as a justification of taxes, but in refutation of the learned gentleman's tions. There was an increase of one-sixth in the consumption of tea; thus the "distressed people" voluntarily submitted to millions of taxes that might be avoided. There was also an increase in the consumption of bricks, soap, &c., the latter shewed also the growth of cleanliness. He mentioned such facts to shew that the difficulties were not irremediable; and that it was any thing but friendship to the people, to inculcate that deC

lusive