parties was infringed upon. The standing order relative to notices required that they should be given at the Michaelmas, or in the August and September, preceding the session, in which the bill was to be brought in. The Michaelmas, the August, and the September, that preceded the last session, were also the Michaelmas, August, and September, preceding this, and therefore the same notice answered for the bills to be now brought in. The same construction had been put on the law of notices in the year 1804, and in the year 1800, in the first session of the United Parliament following the short session of the British Parliament. He thought it rather a strange way of strengthening the argument derived from the inconveniences attending the dissolution, to refuse to alleviate those inconveniences. If an act of Parliament was necessary in the instance where the fees were taken for the public, with the obligation to make them good to a certain amount, an act might be passed to that effect. Lord Howick (in explanation) vindicated himself from the imputation of being disposed to add to the inconveniences arising from the dissolution, which he had every wish to remedy, so far as that could be done without creating public mischief. He denied the application of the precedents of 17:4 and 1800, in the most material circumstances. No resolution, like the present, had been then adopted. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in explanation, said, his resolution applied to the evidence, and not to the standing order. Sir John Newport objected to the resolution, as going to substitute written evidence for parole evidence, with the power of personal examination. Mr. Rose said, the committees were to be at liberty to call for parole evidence whenever they might think it necessary. He thought the House could by its own power obviate the difficulties touching the fees in every instance: for though the fees were, in some instances, appropriated by act of Parliament, they were levied only by a resolution of the House, which the House could dispose of according to its pleasure. Lord H. Pelly allowed that the power of the House may extend as far as the honourable gentleman stated; but it would not, perhaps, be right, after the House had passed SIR HENRY MILDMAY. JUNE 29.1 After a few words from Mr. Bastard and Sir John Anstuther against the motion, Mr. Shaw Lefevre moved, that the debate be adjourned till the next day. This produced a short discussion between the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord Howick, Mr. W. Smith, Mr. C. Wynne, and Mr. C. Dundas, in which it was contended, on the one hand, that there were no grounds, and on the other, that there were ample grounds, for such a postpone ment. The House divided; For the adjournment Majority The resolution was then put and carried. 76 164 88 The Chancellor of the Exchequer then moved a resolu tion, that no petitions on private bills should be received after Monday next. Mr. Ponsonby, Mr. W. Smith, and Lord Howick, contended, that the term was too limited. The Chancellor of the Exchequer acquiescing, it was extended to Wednesday se'nnight. The following resolutions were then agreed to, on the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer : That no private bill be presented after Monday the 13th' of July. That no reports on private bills be received after Monday the 27th of July. The Honourable Cochrane Johnstone gave notice, that he would, the next day, move that there be laid before the House an account of the number of military sent out to the West Indies, from the 1st of January, 1797, to the 1st of January, 1807, with the number of deaths that had taken place, distinguishing privates from oflicers. His object was to call the attention of the House to the dreadful mortality which had taken place in the West India islands, and to propose the appointment of a committee, to investigate and endeavour to counteract the causes of it. SIR HENRY MILDMAY. Sir II. Mildmay rose, in pursuance of his notice given on Friday last (the honourable baronet was so much agitated, that that we could but imperfectly collect the subsequent statements). He did not wish to conceal the anxiety and pain which he felt on the occasion, the greatest part of which proceeded from the consciousness of his insufficiency to addres a public audience. More especially as the gross calumnies and misrepresentations to which his conduct had lately been subjected, rendered him still less capable of explaining with clearness that transaction-the only one in his life in which he had ever been concerned with government. The fourth report of the commissioners of military inquiry had been perverted, for the purpose of casting imputations, which he was convinced never entered into the contemplation of the commissioners themselves. It had been perverted to mean, that he had received undue favour of government, and had taken undue advantage of that favour. Charges had been insinuated, nay, openly made, most repugnant to his feelings, most unwarranted by the report of the commissioners, and, he trusted, most contrary to all the experience of his public and private character. When these charges were made, he had abstained from entering into the lists with his accusers. He had thought it more becoming to the dignity, and more consonant to the respect which he owed to the House, to bear the attack patiently, well knowing that the time would come, when he should have an opportunity to stand up in his place and rebut it. It was a duty which he owed to himself, to his numerous constituents, and to those gentlemen who were in the administration under Mr. Addington at the time of the transaction, more espe cially to one of them, now a lord of the treasury, to say, that he had had no connection with him since the year 1803, when the works which had been so much the subject of conversation were first thrown up. The plain facts were these: In 1795 he had come into the possession of a large estate in Essex, with an annexed condition, requiring his residence at the mansion. He did reside there for six or seven years. In the year 1803 it had been found expedient to throw up some military works, only 400 vards from his house. The pressure of the service had been stated to him, and his permission asked, which was immediately granted. The works were commenced, and, what with the multitude employed upon them (amounting to 1500 men), and the numbers brought to that part of Essex by the fear of invasion, which then prevailed, the neighbourhood neighbourhood assumed the appearance of an entrenched camp; all his out-door property became endangered, his family alarmed, and himself inconvenienced; still, however, he continued to reside there, until matters became so very serious, that nine nights out of ten, footp.d robberies were committed in the adjacent fields. A pe manent barrier was also erected at the distance of half a mile on each side of his house. Under all these circumstances he was induced to make a representation to Mr. Addington, stating the inconveniences under which he l boured, and requesting his assistance to procure him relief by law from the necessity of further residence. The answer (which the honourable baronet read) expressed Mr. Addington's sense of the necessity of some interference, and offered the assistance of government in his favour. His agent waited on one of the secretaries, and the business was accomplished. At that time he had had conversations with several of the officers and others, and found that there was a difficulty in procuring a house for the general to reside in. In these conversations originated the offer of his house, to which, with all its inconveniences (we understood the honourable baronet to say) he should be obliged to return on the 24th of June next; and this offer had been termed a job-a job! he who had uniformly opposed the Addington administration, having never given them a vote during the whole time of their continuance in office; of him it was asserted that this was a job with sinister views. To return, however, to his narrative: As soon as the bill by which he was relieved from his residence, had passed, he made the proposal of giving up the house to Colonel Gordon. Colonel Gordon's reply was, that however desirable the object, he could do nothing without a regular report from the barrack department. By the barrack department, he was referred to the secretary at war. Mr. William Dundas told him, that it would be necessary to send down a surveyor, to inspect the premises, and to make a report accordingly. A Mr. Johnston (whom he had never seen) went down, unaccompanied, uncontrouled; and, having examined the premises, made a report, the substance of which was, that, if repaired, 400. per annum would be a fair rent for the house, with 20 acres of pleasure-ground annexed. this was done without his having interfered in the slightest degree. It might be necessary to mention, that about All eighty years ago, the house had cost 70,000. in building; there were fourteen rooms on a floor; one room was sixty feet long. A large sum having, not many months before, been laid out in repairs, it was agreed that he should then allow the sum of 2001. for repairs, which repairs were commenced on the 24th of June, 1804, although, owing to some changes that took place in the barrack department, the lease was not signed for several months. With regard to all the letters on this subject, which were contained in the report of the commissioners of military inquiry, he wished them to be put out of the question, for he had never seen them till he saw them in the report itself. When government came into possession of the house, he had nothing to do with the repairs that were made. He paid the 2007.; whether that sum or 1000l. was laid out, be knew not, nor did he care, for the vicinity of the works made him anxious to pull the house down. It was a fair transaction, and by no means a compensation to him for giving up the house. On the 18th of August, as the re port stated, a jury was impannelled; eight weeks after, government became possessed of the house. He by no means had influenced the counsel who were heard before that jury. He had never seen their faces. The jury was composed of the most highly respectable persons: their judgment was deliberate: they were three hours locked up; and they gave their verdict, that 1300l. should be paid for the lease of thirty acres of land, unconnected with the house, or with the grounds immediately adjacent. There was nothing in this which prevented, if he chose it, his pulling down the house, the materials of which were estimated at 10,000l. or 500l. a year. Was there any thing in the verdict of the jury, which prohibited him from letting the house to the Speaker of the House of Commons, or to any other individual, or to government ? Certainly not. The verdict was so clear, that it was not capable of misconstruction. He wished that the value of the furniture of the house could be ascertained, or to what sum the full annual valuation would have amounted; and he also wished to know, what gentleman who heard him, having such a house, so furnished, would have considered 400/. a year an equivalent. He appealed to those who had known him for many years, whether, in his conduct, he had evinced any thing which would induce them to believe him capable of a transaction, such as this had been described |