attachment which she had uniformly shewn to this country throughout the war, to assist her to make the best struggle in her power to extricate herself from the state into which she had fallen, from the circumstances and events of the war, without any responsibility of ours. Mr. Ponsonby said, he was glad to hear that the right hon. gent. allowed Sweden was brought into her present situation not by any persuasion of ours, but by the events of the war: she had, therefore, no call on us. He was happy to find there did not appear to be in the mind of the right hon. gent. any wish to induce Sweden to make an obstinate resistance. | tempting such a measure without her consent. He thought the very able and ample manner in which his right hon. friend had explained the subject, was a sufficient elucidation of it, and was convinced ministers were not likely to have obtained the entire acquiescence of the hon. gentlemen opposite, let them have acted how they would. Mr. W. Smith thought that as this was a bare treaty of subsidy, there ought not to be tacked to it any stipulations about binding this country not to conclude peace but in concert with Sweden. He thought, at all events, that at the same time that those political negociations were going forward, there ought to have been a convention for arranging commercial objects. The Resolution was agreed to, and the report was ordered to be received to morrow. Mr. Whitbread then moved the follow The Secretary at War cited the case of Portugal, to prove that no purchased peace could afford security against the arbitrary proceedings of France. Portugal had repeatedly purchased her neutrality, yet after all that country was seized and sub-ng Address, which was negatived without dued by Buonaparte. As long as Sweden could defend herself, it was an advantage to G. Britain as well as to herself to enable her to hold out. Lord H. Petty wished the money to be given to his majesty's ministers in the shape of a vote of credit, to be by them applied according as they should find it necessary and proper to make the advances. The right of either party to make peace, ought to have been kept perfectly free. If the Orders in Council were to be the law, it was essential to take the best measures for their complete execution. He had great satisfaction in thinking that this money was advanced to Sweden merely for the purpose of defending herself and procuring peace, and not for the purpose of exciting useless and destructive wars. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, it seemed to him that which way soever ministers had made the treaty, they would have been equally unlikely to meet with the approbation of the hon. gentlemen opposite; for they all differed in opinion with each other. The first hon. gent. thought it better to keep the money under the controul of parliament. The second was for granting it all at once to buy a peace; and the noble lord came in between these two extremes, and wished to have it as a vote of credit. In one part of the argument, they had contended, that Sweden could not make any effectual struggle, but must be compelled to make peace; and in another they insisted, that if we wished to make peace, Sweden might refuse to do so, and reproach us for at a division: viz. "That an humble Address be presented to his majesty, humbly to represent to his majesty, that his faithful commons, always desirous of supporting the dignity of his majesty's crown, and the faith of engagements contracted by his majesty with foreign powers, will make good the Subsidy granted by his majesty to the king of Sweden. Nevertheless, his majesty's faithful commons feel it to be their duty, to represent to his majesty, that in the present state of the contest with his majesty's enemies, his faithful commons would have been better satisfied to have answered such calls for pecuniary aid as his majesty might have thought expedient to make upon this house, for the purpose of assisting the king of Sweden, under such exigences as his fidelity to G. Britain may bring upon him, rather than to make any grant resulting from the terms of a specific convention. Humbly to represent to his majesty, that his faithful commons have seen, with great concern, by the 3d Article of the Convention with the king of Sweden, which his majesty has been most graciously pleased to direct should be laid upon the table of this house, that his majesty has bound himself not to conclude any peace or truce, or convention of neutrality with the enemy, except in concert and by mutual agreement with the king of Sweden.' A species of engagement, which, as it appears to his majesty's faithful commons, ought never to be entered into excepting upon the most mature deliberation, and when the relative situation of the contracting parties is far different [JESUITS' BARK BILL.] The Chancellor of the Exchequer having moved that the house should resolve itself into a committee on this bill, Mr. Whitbread repeated his objections to the bill, which he characterised as a most abominable measure, calculated only to hold the country up to universal execration. It was the first attempt to put on the statute book any of those ideas which evidently shewed that the moral character of England had been gradually deteriorating. One of those ideas was that infam in case of invasion no quarter should be given to the French troops, but that they should be all massacred, or confined for life to work in mines and coal pits. The object of the bill was, like the old one of hedging in the cuckoo,' impossible. Great quantities of bark were on the continent, and he read a Parisian price current, to shew that bark was much lower in price there than what had been stated. There were, in this country, above a million of pounds of bark, which, in another sense of the word, had become a mere from that in which G. Britain and Sweden, upon by his majesty's ministers for the now stand. That the experience of such successful prosecution of the war." contracts, made in the course of the late war with France, tend to prove that they cannot be binding on the weaker of the two contracting parties, because no manner of obligation can bind a state to its utter ruin; and in the peculiar situation in which Sweden now stands, it appears to this house, but too probable, that all the efforts of his majesty may not be sufficient to preserve her from submission to her enemies, whilst, on the other hand, the perseverance of Sweden in the contest, can in no way be beneficial to G. Britain, and the article in question may throw difficul-ous one, some time ago so prevalent, that ties in the way of negociation for the restoration of the blessings of peace.-To represent to his majesty the surprize of this house, at not finding in the Treaty submitted to its consideration, any Article of Commercial Regulation between the two countries. His majesty's ministers having represented to this house, that the best hope of success, in the present contest, depended upon certain measures affecting the commerce of neutral nations, which are manifestly and avowedly impracticable without the co-operation of Sweden. It was natural to expect, that at a time when Sweden is to be defended with the blood and treasure of G. Britain, some stipulation should have been required from her, that she would not render totally ineffectual the measure which his majesty's ministers have repeatedly declared to be most efficacious, now remaining to be used against France.-That his majesty's faithful commons are the more disappointed at this omission in the present Treaty, because by the 5th Article of the Secret Convention entered into between his majesty and the king of Sweden, and signed at Stockholm on the 3d of Dec. 1804, it appears that commercial arrangements had become matter of discussion between the two powers, and that New points, whereby the commercial interests of the two countries might be more closely connected, were reserved for a particular act.'-In these circumstances his majesty's faithful commons do freely grant to his majesty the supply necessary to make good the promise of his majesty's royal word, but at the same time they deeply lament, that such engagements should have been entered into as may tend to embarrass this country in negociation: and, that stipulations are altogether left out, the omission of which may defeat the means now relied drug,' and it was impossible to sell it on any terms whatever. This bark had been imported under licenses from government. Several persons had invested their whole property in this article, and had, in his opinion, a right to call on his majesty's ministers to require that the public should take it all into their hands. Were they to be consumed for the purpose of carrying into execution the vengeance of the country? Were they to be treated as shells, the explosion of which involved their own destruction? The bill united in itself detestable cruelty with absurd folly. He therefore opposed the Speaker's leaving the chair. Sir C. Price defended the policy of the measure, and contended that it was perfectly justifiable as a mode of warfare. To his certain knowledge, yellow bark had been purchased in London at 10s. per lb. and after having paid 30 per cent. insurance had sold for a considerable profit in France. The withholding of this article must give a facility to the introduction of our manufactures, and in this point of view the measure was most humane, as it tended to relieve the distresses of our manufacturers. The opposition to this measure was part of that systematic plan of thwarting the measures of govern ment, so undeviatingly pursued by the hon. gentlemen opposite, who, in addition to their proceedings in the house, had, by letters and otherwise, instigated the presentation of petitions for peace. Mr. M. A. Taylor asked by what right the hon. aldermen accused any member of a disposition to thwart the measures of government. Such an insinuation should never deter him from expressing his sentiments on any bill that might be submitted to the consideration of the house. This bill contained a proposition most degrading to the country, namely, to carry our hostility into the chambers of the sick. He denied that any attempt had been made on his side of the house to promote petitions for peace; on the contrary, they had discouraged such petitions. The Chancellor of the Exchequer entered into a general defence of the bill, which he contended was not more devoid of humanity, than the bill for prohibiting the exportation of cotton wool, or any other measure which must operate in the first instance most heavily upon the poor of the enemies country, and only circuitously on the government whom it was most desirable to affect. He repeated, that the evils would not be attributable to this country, for that the French government would always have it in their power to remove them by pursuing a reasonable line of conduct. Mr. W. Smith argued against the bill, which he contended would extend those evils by which war was rendered so horrible, and would tend to re-plunge the world into a state of barbarism. Sir W. Elford defended the bill. The principle on which it had been opposed went to this length, that we ought to turn our artillery from the enemy, for a bullet was at least as fatal as a dysentery. We had a right to use every means by which the government of a hostile country might be induced to conclude a reasonable peace. Mr. S. Lushington said, that the principle of the bill met with his most severe reprobation. It would have been better to have withheld from the French the cloathing which it was well known they had obtained from this country. Mr. Gordon defended the bill. There was at present a depot of bark in this country equal to the consumption of 3 years; and he was convinced that France, and the other nations of the continent, must eventually resort to us for a supply of that article. VOL. X. After some further discussion the house then divided, For the Speaker's leaving the chair 92; Against it 29; Majority 63. The bill then passed through a committee. [RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CONDUCT oF THE SPEAKER.] Mr. Secretary Canning wished, before the house rose, to put a question to a right hon. gent. (Mr. Tierney) on the opposite bench. Feeling, as he was persuaded the house also did, a very great interest in every thing which related to the conduct of the person who filled the Chair, and discharged its very arduous duties so highly to their satisfaction, he could not reconcile it to those feelings to have that conduct arraigned, without- Mr. Tierney said, he rose to order, and observed that there was no question before the house. Mr. Canning contended, that by the practice of the house he was entitled to put the question he intended. The question was, whether the right hon. gent. in consequence of what had occurred in an early stage of the sitting proposed to give notice of any motion on the subject? Mr. Tierney avowed that it was his intention in future to prevent that species of debate which was called conversation, unless there was some specific motion before the house, or some understanding established as to the latitude which should be allowed in it. He had felt the inconvenience of being interrupted, at a moment when he was extremely anxious to rescue himself from the charge of inconsistency. The attacks made upon him in that house by the right hon. gent. in perfect good humour, no doubt, he could have well passed by; but he felt some solicitude to obviate the impression which they might make out of doors, if they were allowed to go unrefuted. It was not his intention to make any motion on the subject, but to avail himself of his privilege, as a member of that house, and take the remedy into his own hands. The Chancellor of the Exchequer detailed the circumstances attending the conversation, and inferred that the irregularity commenced with the right hon. gent.'s observations on what he termed the inconsistency of his majesty's ministers. He felt it his duty to retaliate the charge, and here the conversation was stopped, and he conceived properly stopped, by the Chair. Mr. Secretary Canning observed, that a 4 F conversation of that kind became irregular as soon as it was formally taken notice of. By the observation of his right hon. friend (Mr. Foster), who had said, that the conversation being at an end, he would move, &c.' that notice had been taken, and the Speaker, in the impartial prosecution of his duty, was compelled to prevent the right hon. gent. from proceed ing. Lord H. Petty maintained that his right hon. friend, by a rigorous exercise of the orders of the house, had been deprived of an opportunity of refuting a charge preferred against him. The Speaker addressed the house nearly in the following terms:-My conduct having been brought before the judgment of the house, accompanied with no indistinct charge of partiality, I trust I shall be excused for offering a few words to the house on the subject. It has ever been the usage of the house, and it has been found a most convenient usage, to permit questions to be asked, tending to facilitate the arrangement of business. An occurrence of this nature took place this day. The noble lord put a question to a right hon. gent. to which question an answer was given. A right hon. gent. then rose, whose knowledge of the forms and customs of the house induced me to presume, that he would not pass beyond the limits which the occasion prescribed. I find no difficulty in saying, more especially as that right hon. gent. has himself made the acknowledgment, that before the termination of his address, he did pass those limits. The language which that right honourable gent. used called up a right hon. gent. on the opposite side, who replied to him. At that moment several hon. members rose. Had that which then took place not occurred, I frankly state I should have felt it my duty to have put an end to the conversation; but when one of the hon. gentlemen who rose distinctly spoke of the conversation, no choice was left me on the subject. I therefore interrupted the conversation, and on proceeding to read the orders of the day, a question being open, the right hon. gent. rose in his place, and declared that which he had just stated. This was the proceeding as accurately as I can relate it to the house. I appeal to their judgment whether my conduct is liable to the charge of partiality. It may be so, but if it is I own I am not conscious of it. Having been four times raised by the free choice of the house to the Chair which I now occupy, and in which I have sat for 7 years, , I have the consolation to reflect, that this is the first time that any imputation of such a nature has been ascribed to me. I hope that as long as it is the pleasure of the house that I should occupy the honourable situation which I now hold, I may remain free from such an imputation. It is for the house to judge whether I am so free or not; and it is for the house to declare whether they will in future allow the continuance of that usage which has given rise to the present occurrence. When I am instructed what is their pleasure, it will be my duty to conform to those instructions, and to enforce obedience to them, as well as to all the other orders of the house. The house will, I am sure, pardon me for detaining their attention so long on a subject which I own has deeply pained me, although I am not conscious in the course which I have pursued, of having deservedly incurred the censure bestowed on me.-[Loud and reiterated cries from all parts of the house of hear! hear!] Mr. Secretary Canning thought the dis cussion would not be satisfactorily terminated, unless the house came to some declaration of their opinion. He rose, therefore, for the purpose of submitting a resolution expressive of the high sense which the house entertained of the services of the right hon. gent. who filled the Chair. They were all witnesses to the ability and impartiality with which he discharged the arduous duties appertaining to it, in times of as violent contentions of parties and turbulent debate as had ever occurred in that house. The right hon. gent. concluded with moving "That this house does highly approve of the upright, able, and impartial conduct of the right hon. C. Abbot in the Chair of this house." The Speaker having put the affirmative of the question in a very low tone of voice, and obviously much agitated, was answered by a vehement burst of Aye from all sides of the house. When he was about to put the negative proposition, branch of the Mr. Tierney rose and said, that as an independent member of parliament, and anxious to preserve the privileges of the British parliament, he felt himself bound in honour to say No.' The Resolution was then carried as if by acclamation; Mr. Tierney being the only dissenting voice. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Thursday, March 17. [COLD BATH FIELDS PRISON.] Mr. Sumner wished to know, whether it was the intention of the right hon. gent. to found any proceeding upon the petition which he had presented to the house; because if such was his intention, he would not take the business out of his hands. Mr. Sheridan said, that he had stated, when the petition was presented, that it was his wish that some enquiry should be instituted into the grievances complained of in the petition, by his majesty's government, and that if some remedy was not speedily applied to these grievances by them, he should submit some proposition on the subject to the house. For this purpose he wished to give a reasonable time to ministers to suggest some remedial measure. But, after what had happened on a former occasion, he had no great hopes from that quarter, and if nothing was proposed by them in the interval, he should bring forward some specific proposition upon the subject in the course of next week. into alledged abuses in the Cold Bath Fields Prison, by commissioners appointed under the sign manual. Though, from the character of those commissioners, there could be no doubt that they executed their trust faithfully, yet, by their being appointed by the crown, a sort of prejudice and dissatisfaction had always existed with respect to their report, among the common people, whom it was most essential to satisfy on this head. To guard against that evil consequence in the present instance, he intended to move to refer the petition, and the matters connected with it, to a parliamentary committee, to sit up stairs. Looking to the investigation which this committee would make, he would make no observation now on the matters charged in the petition; but with a view to the further information of gentlemen, he would move, "That there be laid before the house a copy of the report of the visiting magistrates of the county of Middlesex, to whom it was referred to inquire into the truth of the allegations of Mr. Sheriff Phillips and Alexander Stephens, with respect to the use of false weights and the distribution of light bread, and other abuses in the Cold Bath Fields Prison." presented the petition, had intimated his intention to wait till he saw what steps were adopted by the executive government; and he had now to state that a commission was preparing, in which all the persons, now alive, who had been on the former commission, would be re-appointed, and such names added, as he was sure, from their respectability, would give satisfaction both to the house and the public. Mr. Sumner had the fullest confidence The Chancellor of the Exchequer did not in the government, and was sure the mem- wish to throw any obstacles in the way of bers for Middlesex would not lose sight a thorough investigation of the grounds of of a matter that called so particularly for complaint stated in the petition, though their attention. But the character of the he did not feel disposed to acquiesce in magistrates of that county was involved, the proposition of the hon. gent. who had and his anxiety to do justice to these re-just sat down. The right hon. gent. who spectable men, could not give way to his deference for any person or persons whatsoever. He questioned whether any steps that would be privately taken by his majesty's government, would satisfy the opposition. He thought it extraordinary that the petitioners, passing by the regular and proper modes of addressing their representations to the magistrates at the quarter sessions, to the magistrates who formed the jail committee, and to the secretary of state for the home department, Sir F. Burdett confessed, that he stood had come in the first instance to parlia- in the predicament of differing in sentiment. He could attribute such a proment with all those who had spoken upon ceeding to no other motive than a desire the subject. In the first place, he proto obtain a bad popularity, by exciting tested against the doctrine of leaving the public clamour to the injury of the cha- grievances of the people to be redressed racters of others. Though the result of by what one hon. gent. had pompously whatever investigation should take place denominated his majesty's government, would, he was well satisfied, be very far or in other words, by the administration from substantiating the charges made, the of the day. The hon. gent. who had petition would yet remain on the journals brought forward the present motion, seeman eternal libel on the magistrates of Mid-ed to entertain the most perverse notions dlesex. He adverted to the former inquiry of the nature of the petition, which it was |