using his influence neither to enrich himself, nor those with whom he is, by family ties, more peculiarly connected, it is impossible for me not to conclude that this man is disinterested. I must say, that he has, with regard to private emolument, acted with a high degree of integrity and moderation. In the course of the long administration of Mr. Pitt, all that he took for himself, was, I believe, the wardenship of the Cinque Ports. This was certainly in him highly disinterested; and his disinterestedness in this respect shines with the more lustre, when we consider the mode in which, according to report, this reward has been since disposed of. I, therefore, Sir, have every reason, from my intimate friendship and near connection with the living, and from my own private feelings and respect for the dead, who undoubtedly possessed many estimable qualities, to give my support to the motion now before the House. I might be led to this by another motive. If personal vanity had any weight with me, I might from this consideration concur with the honourable gentleman. I might by this means gain a great deal of applause, without any loss whatever in a party point of view, and I do not pretend to be insensible to praise any more than others. But there are cases, Sir, in which our public duty is so clear and imperious, that no desire of praise, no motive of personal respect, no wish to gratify our friends, nor any other consideration, however powerful, can possibly enable us to dispense with it, and in my conscience, Sir, I believe this to be one of those cases. If the marks of respect were such as did not compromise my public duty in the compliance, no person would join in it more cheerfully and more eagerly than I would. If, for instance, it had been proposed to remedy those pecuniary difficulties which Mr. Pitt had incurred in the course of his political life; if it had been proposed to do those things for his relations in that way, which his own acknowledged disinterestedness did not allow him to do; if it had been proposed to supply the deficiencies of his own fortune, I would most willingly consent that all this should be done in the most liberal manner. But it is a very different thing to be called upon to confer honours upon Mr. Pitt as an "excellent statesman." We ought not, Sir, in such cases, to be complimented out of our consent, if our public duty commands us to oppose the grant of such honours. Public honours are matters of the highest importance, because they must more or less influence posterity. They ought not, therefore, to be conferred lightly, but only where merit is clearly seen and acknowledged. I could farther add, Sir, that the manner in which the honourable gentleman opened this business, would lead me to give his motion my support; but when public honours are solicited, it becomes me to consult neither my interest nor my feelings, but to adhere rigidly and conscientiously to the line of public duty. I need not add any thing to what has been said respecting honours conferred upon military men and statesmen, by my right honourable friend on the bench near me, (Mr. Windham,) who has so ably and clearly pointed out the distinction between the two cases. As little need I add to what has been said by my honourable friend on my right hand, (Mr. Ponsonby,) respecting many eminent public men, on whom no honours of this kind were conferred, and for whom none were solicited, though their talents, virtues, and good intentions were unquestionable. It is not to particular acts only that we are to look; we must consider the general effect which these acts produce, with a view to the public benefit. Certainly, when I look at Lord Chatham's monument; when I find the inscription bearing upon the face of it the grounds upon which this monument was voted; when I find it there stated, that he had reduced the power of France to a very low ebb, and raised the prosperity of his country to a very high pitch; I must say, that this case can never be compared with that of Lord Chatham. I must say, that the country at present is reduced to the most dangerous and alarming situation-a situation which might call for any thing rather than honours to be conferred upon him, who had the direction of the measures which brought it to this state. The right honourable gentleman (Mr. Rose) has told us, that in the case of Lord Chatham there was the most perfect unanimity, though there were many in the House who had opposed his political principles. Why, so there was; but then, Sir, the merit was clear, and the inscription related to points on which there must have been the most perfect unanimity; and though certainly during the seven years' war there was a strong opposition, yet his merit on certain points, to which the inscription referred, was allowed by the bitterest of his antagonists. But, though no consideration ought to induce us to betray our trust in conferring the public honours, yet at the same time there are cases in which the effects of this might be less sensibly felt. For instance, in cases where we should be compelled to oppose particular acts of an administration, we might still make a clear distinction between what was good and what was bad. In the present case I shall not enter upon the particular acts. In deciding upon this question, I should be unwilling to take any one particular act of the administration of the late minister. I always thought, and do still think, that an unfortunate system of government has pervaded the whole of the present reign; and I firmly believe that system to have been the cause of all the disasters and disappointments which the country has experienced, almost uniformly throughout the whole course of it. Being of this opinion, how can I conscientiously say that he who followed this system was an "excellent statesman?" To that system I ascribe the loss of the American colonies, and I cannot but impute blame, instead of praise or honour, to all the ministers who have supported it. The Earl of Guildford who conducted the war, in the event of which those colonies were lost, was a man of very uncommon talents, and of very amiable qualities. Towards the latter part of his life, I was connected with him, not only in political opinions, but also in habits of the most intimate friendship, But, notwithstanding all that, I have no hesitation in declaring, that if, at the decease of that nobleman, any motion similar to the present had been made in this House, much as I esteemed and loved him, and still more dearly as I loved his son, the late earl, I should have been the very foremost to oppose it. Thinking as I do of the disastrous effects of that system, which I before stated to have prevailed throughout the present reign, I cannot but accuse the late minister of having, I will not say criminally, for the expression might sound, in some ears, too harsh, but, most unfortunately, lent his brilliant talents and his commanding eloquence, to the support of it. In having done so, and with the knowledge he must have had of it, I esteem him the more culpable, as without that splendour of mental endowment, which enabled him to throw a veil over the hideous deformity of the system alluded to, I am fully persuaded, that it could not have resisted the attacks made upon it, and consequently could not have existed, and spread its baneful influence half so long. No man can be more desirous than I am, to bury in oblivion the remembrance of those contests in which we were so long engaged. This I shewed plainly enough while he was alive. But, I cannot consent to confer public honours, on the ground of his being an "excellent statesman," on the man, who, in my opinion, was the sole, certainly the chief supporter of a system, which I had early been taught to consider as a bad one. Thinking thus, it cannot be expected that I should so far forget my public duty, and the principles which I have uniformly professed, as to subscribe to the condemnation of those principles, by agreeing to the motion now before the House. But, I defy the honourable gentleman, I defy any person who differs from me, I defy any one of those who are most desirous of misrepresenting my motives, to point out any possible feeling of interest or ambition, that could induce me to oppose it. My motive is a sense of public duty, which would be violated, if I were to agree to confer honours, on grounds which to me do not appear to warrant my concurrence. Sir, I am sorry that this motion was ever made. I said so before, and if those who were most nearly connected with Mr. Pitt by the ties of blood, and who may be supposed to be most interested in his glory, and the respect that is to attend his memory, had been consulted, I believe a mode might have been struck out, by which a suitable mark of respect might have been conferred on him, without reducing us to this dilemma. Now, however, it is too late. The thing is done, and cannot be helped, and nothing remains for us but to do our duty, however much our feelings may be hurt by the performance. I must therefore conclude with saying, that, in my opinion, my public duty calls upon me, in the most imperious and irresistible manner, to oppose the motion; and that, however painful to my feelings in every respect it may be, I must do my duty. LORD ELLENBOROUGH'S APPOINTMENT TO A SEAT IN THE CABINET. IN March 3. N consequence of the appointment of Lord Chief Justice Ellenborough to a seat in the cabinet, Mr. Spencer Stanhope this day moved the following resolutions: 1. "That it is the * In the course of the month of February 1806, a complete change of ministers took place. The following is a list of the new administration: President of the Council-Earl Fitzwilliam. Lord High Chancellor-Lord Erskine. Lord Privy Seal — Viscount Sidmouth. First Lord of the Treasury (prime minister)- Lord Grenville. Secretary of State for the Home Department-Earl Spencer. opinion of this House, that it is highly expedient that the functions of a minister of state and of a confidential adviser of the executive measures of government, should be kept distinct and separate from those of a judge at common law. 2. That it is the opinion of this House, that those members of his majesty's most honourable privy council, whom his majesty is advised to direct to be habituatly summoned, and who are so summoned to that committee or selection of the said council, which deliberates upon matters of state, and which is commonly known by the name of the cabinet council, are, and are deemed to be, the confidential ministers and advisers of the executive measures of government. 3. That the so summoning to the said committee, or cabinet council, a lord chief justice of England, to sit and deliberate as a member of the same, is a practice peculiarly inexpedient and unadvisable, tending to expose to suspicion, and bring into disrepute the independence and impartiality of the judicial character, and to render less satisfactory, if not less pure, the administration of public justice." The resolutions were supported by Mr. Canning, Lord Castlereagh, Mr. Perceval, and Mr. Wilberforce; and opposed by Mr. Bond, who moved the other orders of the day, Earl Temple, Mr. Fox, Lord Henry Petty, and Mr. Sheridan. Mr. Secretary Fox rose and spoke as follows: With regard, Sir, to the question before the House, I must say, that the introduction of it is to me matter of surprise. It is the first instance that I have ever heard of such a thing as the cabinet council becoming the subject of debate in this House. I never knew the exercise of the king's prerogative in the appointment of his ministers to be brought into question upon such grounds as have been stated this Secretary of State for the Department of War and the Colonies-Right Hon. William Windham. Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench-Lord Ellenborough. Chancellor and Under-Treasurer of the Exchequer - Lord Henry Petty. President of the Board of Controul for the Affairs of India-Lord Minto. Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster-Earl of Derby. President of the Board of Trade- Lord Auckland. Secretary at War Right Hon. Richard Fitzpatrick. Treasurer of the Navy Right Hon. Richard Brinsley Sheridan. Joint Paymaster-General - Earl Temple, Lord John Townshend. Joint Postmaster-General - Earl of Buckinghamshire, Earl of Carysfort. Secretaries of the Treasury-Right Hon. Nicholas Vansittart, John King, Esq. Master of the Rolls-Sir William Grant. Lord High Chancellor - Right Hon. George Ponsonby Chancellor of the Exchequer - Right Hon. Sir J.Newport of Ireland. |