tions and reproaches from the former. The court of Petersburgh was unquestionably entitled to suppose that they would receive support from this country, either by military diversion or by pecuniary assistance; they had neither. A proposal made by Russia to negotiate in this country a loan for six millions had been refused. He did not state this as attaching blame to the late ministers, for he fairly allowed that the negotiation of such a loan must, in effect, after the experience which this country had had, be considered as entailing a great risk, if not ultimately a burden, on us. But, there was a wide difference between refusing that loan and doing nothing. We might have declined making so considerable an exertion without disappointing Russia, by leaving her altogether without help. Had we agreed to raise 4 millions, or 3 millions, or 2 millions (for which of course provision must have been made as for a subsidy), we should at least have gratified the feelings of his imperial majesty; but of such an intention on the part of the late government no trace existed in the records of the foreign office. This complete refusal was the more censurable, as no power on the continent had been so uniformly faithful to its pecuniary engagements as Russia. When the wants of the Russian army were so pressing, towards the latter end of the last campaign, lord Hutchinson, in the sound exercise of the discretion with which he was invested, had advanced the misera-jects. That in the course of that exble sum of 30,000l. to relieve them from pedition, it was diverted from a point their embarrassments. Since the war be- where it would have been successful, to tween the two countries that money had a point where it could not, was a part been repaid. With respect to the charge of the subject which could not be enbrought by the Russian government against tered into with minuteness in his majesthe late administration of this country, forty's Declaration. In moving for the cordisturbing their commerce by unnecessary detentions, the present administration had refuted it in the face of Europe, with as much anxiety and decision as if it had been preferred against themselves. Though he thought it had been sufficiently refuted, he had no objection to the laudable desire expressed by the hon. gent. of vindicating his friends by the production of papers on the subject. The hon. gent. was desirous to obtain the dispatches from this country, containing those assurances of support and co-operation, which it was stated in his majesty's declaration, that his imperial majesty had received and acknowledged, with apparent confidence and satisfaction.' The hon. gent. implied, that in that passage of his majesty's Declaration, VOL. X. a distinction was meant studionsly to be taken, between the last and the present administration; and that the assurances referred to, as having given such lively satisfaction to his imperial majesty, were the assurances of the present admistration alone. The hon. gent. was mistaken: the Declaration referred to the assurances communicated to Russia in March, by lord Hutchinson, from the last government, as well as to those communicated in April from the present government. How could his majesty's ministers more fairly defend the conduct of their predecessors, than by their identifying that conduct with their own? On the accusations by Russia, of our interrupting her commerce, of our withholding from her pecuniary and military aid; as those accusations were stated in the Russian Declaration, he did not see that there was any thing that would be deficient in the information, which would be produced by the hon. gent.'s motions. But, there was a specific charge brought by Russia against this country, namely, the Expedition to Alexandria, which the hon. gent.'s motions would not sufficiently elucidate. In the correspondence of his majesty's existing government with the court of St. Petersburgh (without any reference to their private opinion), that expedition had been defended against Russia, on the ground that the war with Turkey had been undertaken by this country on Russian instigation, and for Russian ob- · respondence respecting the offer of mediation between Great Britain and France, made by Austria, the hon. gent. thought that the chasm which existed from the month of April to the month of Nov. in the official notes between prince Starhemberg and the British secretary of state, an extraordinary one. It was easily to be accounted for. The proposal of mediation was made in April, while the campaign on the continent was proceeding, and before Prussia and Austria had made a separate peace. Under those circumstances, it was cheerfully accepted by this country, subject only to the condition that we must not be expected to depart from our good faith with other powers. Mr. Adair was then at Vienna, but it was a 2 R matter of general knowledge, that when right hon. gent. expect that the emperor a negotiation was carrying on between should have sent, or delivered, a dispatch two courts, that the correspondence from to lord II.? He would wish to know, howthe court where the negotiation was car- ever, why the communication had been rying on, to the minister at the other court, made to lord H. but that he might impart consisted only of a transmission of the it to his government? Why it had been official documents; lest a cross negotia- by him communicated to our ambassador tion should be produced. Lord Pembroke but for the same reason? And why the soon after that time, was appointed the ambassador had thought it of such conseBritish minister at Vienna. Had his lord-quence as again to communicate it to the ship found the terms of mediation accept secretary of state for foreign affairs? It ed by the other powers, he would have was said however, that this last commucommunicated that acceptance to his go-nication was made by a private letter. vernment at home; but his voyage and He did not ask for the private letter, but journey had been so delayed by unfavour- for the genuine purport of the communiable circumstances, that he did not arrive at cation. When the chief of a government, Vienna, until the latter end of June. A offering to us his mediation, condescended few hours afterwards the fatal news of the to communicate on that subject with a nabattle of Friedland reached that capital; tive of this country, and that communicaand of course no more was heard of tion was transmitted to our official servants Austrian mediation; nor had government at home, was not the house entitled to received any other political communica- know that such mediation was not improtion of importance from the continent, un- vidently slighted? As to the right hon. til that offer (at the desire of France) gent.'s observations on a member of this which was then on the table. house, but not now present (Mr. GrenMr. Ponsonby felt a good deal of as-ville) that was all a joke; the observation tonishment at the conduct of the right was below him. At least it was below hon. gent. who had just sat down. His the house to listen to it. He, the king's observations seemed all to be stated from minister, received from the king's amthe question, rather than to the question,bassador, and for the people of this kingand to have been prepared more in con-dom, a letter, the very essence and quatemplation of an accusation against the lity of which proved it to be of a public late ministers, than to have presented and important nature. Did the right themselves on the motion of his hon.hon. gentleman deny it was so? Did he friend. First, the late ministers were cul- allege that his friend lord G. L. Gower pable in having held out assurances, or had sitten down to write him a letter of exciting hopes of co-operation to the pleasure; that he had entertained him continental powers. Again, they were with an account of a concert or dance; wrong in not granting a subsidy under the that it contained an account of all the description of a loan. In one point he beautiful ladies of St. Petersburgh; or was perfectly ready to agree with the that it was a letter facetious and entertainright hon. gent. that it would be highly ing? He could say no such thing.improper, that any communication should Would the noble lord stand up and say be made which could at all go to affect that it was a private correspondence by one any districts, the inhabitants of which individual, not connected with the king': were now subject to the emperor of the service, to another individual not connect+ French. He was certain his hon. friended with the king's service, and on a subject would agree with him in thinking, that nothing could be so wrong as to put the French in possession of any information which could enable them to wreak their vengeance on persons in this unfortunate predicament. But, the right hon. gent. said the communications made by the emperor of Russia to lord Hutchinson cannot be produced, because they are verbal. He believed there never was an instance of a crowned head making any other but verbal communications to those who were in his confidence. Did the not connected with the king's service? On the contrary, would he not say, that it contained communications from the emperor of Russia on the subject of his mediation between this country and France? How the letter was addressed to the right hon. gent. was of little consequence, its contents must shew whether it was in its nature public or private. He should sup pose that the right hon. gent. were to be impeached for neglecting a favourable opportunity of concluding a peace, and that he should say he was indeed perfectly aware of the fact, but that he did not chuse | tion of the house on nothing-a subject on < to treat because the communication which had been made to him was of a private nature, to which he did not think himself entitled in his public capacity to attend. Would that be esteemed a sufficient vindication of his conduct? Would it not be said to him, It is not sufficient for you to allege that the information you had was private; you knew well it was authentic? If lord H. was once the confidential agent of this country, and the emperor chose to send for him, and communicate his intentions to him, was it not the same as if he had done so to the accredited agent of this country for the time, and he had again made the communication to our ambassador? Was not lord H. to be entitled to the same degree of belief as if he had been the accredited agent of this country? Had the letter been in a different form, still it could have contained no more than it now did; and if these contents were important, there was no reason why the form of the letter should prevent the substance of it from coming before the house. The house had a right to know what it contained. As to the other papers connected with this subject, to the production of which the right hon. gent. said he had no objection, what would they enable the house to do, farther than just to form a conjecture of the tone, frame, and temper of mind which actuated the emperor of Russia in the mediation in question, as to which the letter alluded to would have afforded a complete proof? The right hon. gent. refused to the house the thing itself, but he granted them something else, which would enable them to form a conjecture as to what was refused them. which, however, the right hon. gent. could display his abilities: he, unfortunately, never found himself so much at home. -The first motion was then agreed to. Mr. Whitbread begged leave to alter his second motion, by substituting the Substance' for a Copy' of the communication from lord Hutchinson. Mr. Secretary Canning opposed the motion in its amended from, because the substitution of the word 'substance' for 'copy,' in no way changed the merits of the question. He begged to be understood as putting the individual merits of lord Hutchinson wholly aside. He professed to have a high respect for the character of that noble person; but contended that the question ought to be discussed without any regard whatever to his character. When a person was delegated by the crown to represent it at a foreign court, he conceived it to be invariably meant, that the interests of the country were confided solely to this individual, and that all communications of a public nature, in as far as they tended to influence the conduct of the government at home, ought to come through this channel. If it should be argued, that the communication, for the production of which the hon. gent. had now moved, came through this channel, still he would maintain, that an ambassador at a foreign court had a discretionary power of judging what communications he should transmit to his government in a public and official shape, and what he might think proper to make in a private and confidential manner. To the latter of these descriptions, the communication alluded to by the hon. gent. belonged; and Mr. Secretary Canning rose to state his on that account he did not judge it a fit regret that the right hon. gent. who had paper to be produced. If the hon. gent. last addressed the house, should have imagined that this was the only instance in shewn himself totally ignorant of the ques-which- accounts of conversations which tion before the house. He had discus- certain individuals had held with the emased the propriety of giving all the informa-peror of Russia, and of which his majesty's tion required, while the question now before the house was, the propriety of granting information on the proposed Mediation of Austria alone. Mr. Adam called the right hon. secretary to order; but, at the reinonstrance of the Speaker, sat down. Mr. Ponsonby said, he had only taken the right hon. gent. at his word. The right hon. secretary had said, nothing could be given of information to the house on the subject of Austria; he was, therefore, disinclined to attempt to fix the atten government were in possession, he was under a great mistake. He was in possession of minutes of conversations which other persons, for whom he had as much respect as for the noble lord, had held with that sovereign, and the purport of which was certainly very different [a cry of hear! hear! from the opposition bench]. The hon. gent. might refuse to rely on such conversations; but he was equally entitled to refuse his confidence in that in which they trusted; and the simple fact was, that his majesty's government did not find it 1 ambassador to his government, and as it was necessary to enable the house to judge of the conduct of government, he could not see upon what grounds it could be reasonably withheld. self, under all the circumstances, warrant- | table, that he had applied the word cross, ed in changing the line of policy which not to feelings, but to correspondence]; they had adopted, and were determined well, said Mr. P. a misunderstanding to pursue, in consequence of lord H.'s between two noble persons. This, he communication. He deprecated extreme- was sure, was an insinuation to which the ly the present motion, not only because house would not listen for a moment. But, it was calculated for the invidious purpose was the right hon. gent. serious when he of creating misunderstandings, but because talked of putting aside the character of he conscientiously believed that if the lord Hutchinson, and if he did this because present motion was agreed to, it would it happened to suit his purpose, did he countenance the idea that if any British suppose that he would acquiesce in the traveller [loud cries of hear! hear!] hap- attempt so to do? For this he must have pened accidentally, from afiability of man- the consent of two parties, and certainly ners, or any other cause, to recommend he never would have his. He might wave himself at a foreign court, so as to have the consideration of the noble lord's chafrequent opportunities of communicating racter for himself, but he should not do so in private with the prince, he might in- for him. Nor would he admit the puerile stitute a cross correspondence, calculated comparison which he had thought proper to shake the confidence of the government to institute between that noble person, of his own country in the communications and any young man who might be abroad which it received from its own accredited on his travels. The communication now agent. He might, for example, put a pos- moved for, was considered of sufficient imsible case, which he stated simply as pos-portance to be transmitted by his majesty's sible, from having read the history of former times-should a young man (he would not say connected with any party, for parties were not supposed to exist), but should a young man while abroad on his travels, happen, accidentally, to go to a Dr. Laurence expressed his surprize, that foreign court while an important and deli- the right hon. gent. should have repre-' cate negociation was pending between that sented the motion of his hon. friend, as court and his own, should he insinuate made for the invidious purpose of creating himself into the confidence of that court, misunderstanding, at the same time that and in his communications with his friends he himself introduced an allusion into his at home, give information directly the re- speech to an affair which had happened verse of that transmitted by the king's many years ago, at which time inquiry was plenipotentiary, and by these means per-challenged into all the circumstances, and plex the councils of ministers, and introduce confusion, into the measures of government, it would be a natural effect of that principle for which the hon. gent contended in his present motion. It would, he contended, be recurring to the system of double diplomacy, which had been acted upon in the reign of Louis XIV. when some young man was generally sent along with the accredited representative of the sovereign to foreign courts, who insinuated himself into the confidence of the prince, the minister, or the mistress of the minister, and who was employed as a check upon the correspondence of the ambassador, a system which he was convinced the house would not be of opinion as proper to adopt, in conducting the affairs of this country. Mr. Ponsonby replied, that the right hon. gent. had alledged, that the motion of his hon. friend was calculated to produce cross feelings [Mr. Canning said across the At the very time too, in which a gentleman was implicated, who dispatch with dear sir,' or dear Canning,' entirely to defeat all inquiry. He contended, that there was no analogy whatever between the case in question, and the double diplomacy of Louis XIV. because the communication to which it referred was transmitted by the accredited agent of government; and he put the right hon. gent. in mind, that it was only now called for in consequence of the system of misrepresentation, which he had been the first to introduce into debate by reading partial extracts from documents, for the purpose of giving more effect to a brilliant speech., Sir T. Turton contended that all prece dents were against the production of papers relating to confidential conversations with sovereigns. He commended the resistance made by the secretary of state in the present instance. It was only by a reserve of this kind that the dispositions of sovereigns and their ministers, to hold confidential communications with us, could be preserved. He was ready to vote for the production of all papers necessary to the justification of the late ministers, from the charges preferred against them throughout the country. But he would not consent to the production of any papers, not in themselves proper to be produced and called for, only from mere party motives. He professed a great personal esteem for the noble lord, who was particularly interested in the production of the paper principally alluded to, and he therefore lamented the more, that the noble lord had disclosed as much as he had done. Mr. Whitbread hoped, notwithstanding the general cry of question, that the house would permit him to make one or two observations, in reply to what had fallen from the other side. The right hon. secretary, with his usual ingenuity, had contrived to favour the house with two speeches upon the same subject; but had, whether from design or inadvertency, wholly departed in his second speech from the line of argument adopted in his first; at one time a paper called for was objected to as unofficial; and at another, the substance of that paper was refused, because the source of the intelligence was not at that time duly accredited. The right hon. gent. set out with requiring to be understood as speaking to the general principle, and then proceeded to state the particular case of Mr. Adair. This was certamly a very curious way of speaking to a general principle, without any reference to individuals. The right hon. gent. had talked a good deal on the confusion that would arise in the public business, from the consequences of a double diplomacy; and had taken great pains to impress upon the house the meaning of cross-dispatches, by the pantomimical gesture of crossing his fingers-(a laugh). He was resolved, it appeared, to take his stand by the accredited, and the accredited only. He would not look at lord Hutchinson, but the general principle; and in the same breath, the right honourable secretary, spoke of English travellers passing through any continental court, &c. How was he to understand the right honourable secretary? Did he mean to say, that lord H. was merely in an ordinary character? Was his lordship to be considered merely as one of the heedless, gay, young travellers that occasionally sojourn at a continental court; whose intelligence must have been as unimportant as his observations were superficial? It was not a trifling familiar communication of court scandal from any of the buffoons or parasites that flutter about the person of the minister, the mistress, or the crowned head, that was demanded. What he asked for was the information which the right hon. gent. in his capacity as foreign minister, received from our accredited minister at the court of Russia, Id. G. L. Gower. And what was the avowed source of that information communicated by the noble lord, to the right hon. gent.? No less a source than lord Hutchinson, who had at that time but just ceased to be an accredited minister himself. What had been the character of lord H.'s mission? Had he not the confidence of the Prussian court to such a degree, that he felt himself warranted in advancing on the part of this country, 30,000l. for the immediate service of the Russian army? And yet they were to be told, that his lordship was to be loooked upon, in discussing the present question, merely in the light of an ordinary English traveller; if so, he would ask the noble lord why he thought it expedient to lay such stress upon the communication made to him by lord H. as to forward it with his other dispatches to the foreign minister of this country? If he did not so forward it on account of the individual, he must have forwarded it from a just consideration of its importance. But this importance was coupled with no necessity of secrecy, or mysterious apprehension of disclosure: and why not, then, give it to the house and |