Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

of countenancing any act which either immedi- | he was against me, and our conduct was violent ately or ultimately tended to the prejudice of his country, or the injury of the Constitution.22 I have had the honor of knowing the noble Earl from an early age. I have observed the motives of his actions; I am endeared to him by every ie of kindred sentiment and of mutual principle. A character more dignified and exalted exists not in the empire; a mind more firmly attached to the Constitution of his country. He is, what the nation would desire in the heir of Lord Rockingham, the only compensation that we could have for his loss.

and unconstitutional, it was treasonable ! And yet the means were in both instances the same the means were the votes of this House! A game of a two-fold quality is playing by the other side of the House upon this occasion, to which I hope the House, and I hope the kingdom, will attend. They are endeavoring to injure us through two channels at the same time; through a certain great quarter, and through the people. They are attempting to alarm the first by asserting that this bill increases the influence of ministry against the Crown; and rousing the An honorable gentleman on the other side people, under an idea that it increases the influ[Mr. T. Pitt] has used violent terms against this ence of the Crown against them. That they will bill and the movers of it. Sir, I tell that honor- fail in both, I doubt not. In the great quarter able gentleman [looking him directly in the face] I trust they are well understood, and the princethat the movers of this bill are not to be brow-ly mind of that high person is a security against beaten by studied gestures, nor frightened by their devices. They are running swiftly to take tremulous tones, solemn phrases, or hard epi-off whatever little imposition might have been thets. To arguments they are ready to reply; put upon any part, even of the multitude; and I but all the notice they can take of assertions is wish to rescue the character of the public unto mark to the House that they are only asser-derstanding from the contemptuous implication, tions. The honorable gentleman again repeats that it is capable of being gulled by such artihis favorite language of our having seized upon fices. I feel for my country's honor when I say the government. His Majesty changed his minis- that Englishmen, free themselves, and fond of try last April, in consequence of a vote of this giving freedom to others, disdain these strataHouse; his Majesty did the same twelve months gems, and are equally above the silliness of credbefore [when Lord North was displaced], in con- iting the revilers of this act, and the baseness sequence of a vote of this House. His Majesty, of confederating or making common cause with in so doing, followed the example of his prede- those who would support a system which has cessors; and his successors will, I doubt not, fol- dishonored this country, and which keeps thirty low the example of his Majesty. The votes of millions of the human race in wretchedness. I Parliament have always decided upon the dura- make allowances for the hair-brained, headstrong tion of the ministry, and always will, I trust. It delusions of folly and ignorance, and the effects is the nature of our Constitution; and those who of design. To such evils every measure is liadislike it had better attempt to alter it. The ble, and every man must expect a portion of the honorable gentleman called the change in 1782 consequence. But for the serious and grave dea glorious one; this in 1783 a disgraceful one. terminations of the public judgment I have the Why? For a very obvious, though a very bad highest value; I ever had, and ever shall have. reason. The honorable gentleman assisted in ef- If it be a weakness, I confess it, that to lose the fecting the first, and strenuously labored to pre- good opinion of even the meanest man gives me vent the second. The first battle he fought with some pain; and whatever triumph my enemies us; the second against us, and we vanquished can derive from such a frame of mind they are him. In 1782 his friends were out, and would welcome to. I do not, after the example of the be in. In 1783 his friends were in, nor would honorable gentleman who began this debate [Mr. go out. Thus, having done without him what Powys], hold the opinion of constituents in diswe once did with him, the House sees his mo- paragement. The clear and decided opinion of tive. It is human nature, certainly; but certain- the more reasonable and respectable should, in ly not the better part of human nature. He says my opinion, weigh with the member, upon the he is no party man, and abhors a systematic op- same principle that, I think, the voice of the naposition. I have always acknowledged myself tion should prevail in this House, and in every to be a party man. I have always acted with other place. But when the representative yields a party in whose principles I have confidence; to the constituent, it should, indeed, be by the and if I had such an opinion of any ministry as majority of the reasonable and respectable; and the gentleman professes to have of us, I would not, as we shall see in a day or two, some of pursue their overthrow by a systematic opposi- the honestest men in England voting against tion. I have done so more than once, and I think the most popular tax ever introduced into this that, in succeeding, I saved my country. Once House, in direct opposition to their own convicthe right honorable gentleman, as I have said, tion, and not upon the opinion of either the more was with me, and our conduct was fair, manly, respectable or reasonable class of their constitconstitutional, and honorable. The next time uents.23

22 Earl Fitzwilliam had been named by Mr. Fox as the first of the Commissioners under this bill. The names of the remainder were withheld until the bill should have passed.

My noble friend [Sir John Cavendish], with 23 This refers to the Receipt Tax, for the repeal of which Alderman Newnham had made a motion a few days before.

us; if we are opposed upon other principles, they will not be against us. Much labor has been employed to infuse a prejudice upon the present subject; but I have the satisfaction to believe that the labor has been fruitless, making a reasonable allowance for the mistakes of the uninformed, the first impressions of novelty, and the natural result of deliberate malice. We desire to be tried by the test of this bill, and risk our character upon the issue; confiding thoroughly in the good sense, the justice, and the spirit of Englishmen. Not lofty sounds, nor selected epithets, nor passionate declamation in this House, nor all the sordid efforts of interested men out of this House-of men whose acts in the East have branded the British name, and whose ill gotten opulence has been working through a thousand channels to delude and debauch the public understanding – can fasten odium upon this measure, or draw an obloquy upon the authors of it. We have been tried in the cause of the public, and until we desert that cause we are assured of public confidence and protection.

his characteristic spirit, has said, that we never upon these principles, and the people were with sought power by cabal, or intrigue, or underhand operations; and this he said in reply to an honorable gentleman [Mr. T. Pitt], whose conduct demonstrates that he thinks these the surest path for his friends. This bill, as a ground of contention, is farcical. This bill, if it admitted it, would be combated upon its intrinsic qualities, and not by abusing the Coalition or raising a clamor about influence. But why don't the gentlemen speak out fairly, as we do; and then let the world judge between us? Our love and loyalty to the sovereign are as ardent and firm as their own. Yet the broad basis of public character, upon which we received, is the principle by which we hope to retain this power, convinced that the surest road to the favor of the prince is by serving him with zeal and fidelity; that the safest path to popularity is by reducing the burden, and restoring the glory of the nation. Let those (looking at Mr. Jenkinson) who aim at office by other means, by inscrutable and mysterious methods, speak out; or, if they will not, let the world know it is because their arts will not bear examination, and that their safety consists in their obscurity. Our principles are well known; and I should prefer to perish with them, rather than prosper with any other.

24

The honorable gentleman [Mr. Powys] has supposed for me a soliloquy, and has put into my mouth some things which I do not think are likely to be attributed to me. He insinuates that I was incited by avarice, or ambition, or party spirit. I have failings in common with every human being, besides my own peculiar faults; but of avarice I have indeed held myself guiltless. My abuse has been for many years even the profession of several people; it was their traffic, their livelihood; yet until this moment I knew not that avarice was in the catalogue of the sins imputed to me. Ambition I confess I have, but not ambition upon a narrow bottom, or built upon paltry principles. If, from the devotion of my life to political objects; if, from the direction of my industry to the attainment of some knowledge of the Constitution and the true interests of the British empire, the ambition of taking no mean part in those acts that elevate nations and make a people happy, be criminal, that ambition I acknowledge. And as to party spirit-that I feel it, that I have been ever under its impulse, and that I ever shall, is what I proclaim to the world. That I am one of a party -a party never known to sacrifice the interests, or barter the liberties of the nation for mercenary purposes, for personal emolument or honors

The honorable gentleman under the gallery [Mr. Martin] also says he dislikes systematic opposition. Whether perpetually rising up with peevish, capricious objections to every thing proposed by us deserve that name or not, I leave the gentleman himself to determine, and leave the House to reflect upon that kind of conduct which condemns the theory of its own constant practice. But I meet the gentleman directly upon the principle of the term. He dislikes systematic opposition; now I like it. A systematic opposition to a dangerous government is, in my opinion, a noble employment for the brightest faculties; and if the honorable gentleman thinks our administration a bad one, he is right to contribute to its downfall. Opposition is natural in such a political system as ours. It has subsisted in all such governments; and perhaps it is necessary. But to those who oppose, it is extremely essential that their manner of conducting it incur not a suspicion of their motives. If they appear to oppose from disappointment, from mortification, from pique, from whim, the people will be against them. If they oppose from public principle, from love of their country rather than hatred to administration, from evident conviction of the badness of measures, and a full persuasion that in their resist--is my pride and my boast. ance to men they are aiming at the public welfare, the people will be with them. We opposed

24 Mr. Jenkinson had entered life as the protégé of Lord Bute, and was looked upon for many years as the pivot of every court intrigue, the confidential agent of the King, and the prime mover in all kinds of secret influence; hence this pointed allusion. He was afterward known as Lord Hawkesbury, and at a subsequent period as Lord Liverpocl.

a party linked together upon principles which comprehend whatever is most dear and precious to free men, and essential to a free Constitution

The honorable gentleman has given me one assertion which it is my pride to make; he says that I am connected with a number of the first families in the country 25 Yes, sir, I have a peculiar glory that a body of men, renowned for their ancestry, important for their possessions, distinguished for their personal worth, with all

25 The Rockingham Whigs.

Our merit will be more in

this, when the names of those are known whom we mean to propose to this House, to execute this commission. [Name them, said Mr. Arden, across the House.] I will not. I will not name them.

that is valuable to men at stake-hereditary for- | of any man's virtue. tunes and hereditary honors-deem me worthy of their confidence. With such men I am something-without them, nothing. My reliance is upon their good opinion; and in that respect, perhaps, I am fortunate. Although I have a just The bill shall stand or fall by its own confidence in my own integrity, yet, as I am merits, without aid or injury from their characbut man, perhaps it is well that I have no choice ter. An honorable gentleman has said these but between my own eternal disgrace and a Commissioners will be made up of our "adherfaithful discharge of my public duty, while men ents and creatures." Sir, there is nothing more of this kind are overseers of my conduct, while easy than to use disparaging terms; yet I should men whose uprightness of heart and spotless have thought the name of Earl Fitzwilliam would honor are even proverbial in the country [look- have given a fair presumption that the colleagues ing at Lord John Cavendish], are the vigils of we shall recommend to this House for the comy deeds, it is a pledge to the public for the execution of this business with that noble Lord, purity and rectitude of my conduct. The pros will not be of a description to merit these unperity and honor of the country are blended with handsome epithets. I assure the honorable genthe prosperity and honor of these illustrious per- tleman they are not. I assure him they are not They have so much at stake, that if the men whose faculties of corrupting, or whose corcountry falls they fall with it; and to counteruptibility, will give any alarm to this House, or nance any thing against its interest would be a suicide upon themselves. The good opinion and protection of these men is a security to the nation for my behavior, because if I lose them I lose my all.

sons.

to this country. They are men whose private and public characters stand high and untainted; who are not likely to countenance depredation, or participate the spoils of rapacity. They are not men to screen delinquency, or to pollute the

such men as Earl Fitzwilliam suffer unbecom ing appointments to be made? Is Earl Fitzwilliam a man likely to do the dirty work of a minister? If they, for instance, were to nominate a Paul Benfield to go to India in the supreme council, would Earl Fitzwilliam subscribe to his appointment? This is the benefit of having a commission of high honor, chary of reputation, noble and pure in their sentiments, who are su perior to the little jobs and traffic of political intrigue.26

Having said so much upon the extraneous sub-service by disgraceful appointments. Would jects introduced by the honorable gentleman [Mr. Powys] into the debate, I shall proceed to make some observations upon the business in question. When the learned gentleman [Mr. | Dundas] brought in his bill last year, the House saw its frightful features with just horror; but a very good method was adopted to soften the terrors of the extravagant power which that bill vested in the Governor General. The name of a noble Lord [Lord Cornwallis] was sent forth at the same time, whose great character lent a grace to a proposition which, destitute of such But this bill, sir, presumes not upon the proban advantage, could not be listened to for one ity of the men; it looks to the future possibilimoment. Now, sir, observe how differently wety of dissimilar successors, and to the morality have acted upon the same occasion.

of the present Commissioners, who are merely Earl Fitzwilliam has been spoken of here this human, and therefore not incapable of alteration. day, in those terms of admiration with which his Under all the caution of this bill, with the rename is always mentioned. Take notice, how-sponsibility it imposes, I will take upon me to ever, that we did not avail ourselves of the fame of his virtue and abilities in passing this bill through the House.

If such a thing were to have taken place as the institution of an Indian secretaryship (according to the suggestions of some gentlemen), this noble Lord would certainly have been the very person whom, for my part, I should have advised his Majesty to invest with that office. Yet, although his erect mind and spotless honor would have held forth to the public the fullest confidence of a faithful execution of its duties, the objections in regard to influence upon a removable officer, are ten-fold in comparison with the present scheme. The House must now see, that with all the benefits we might derive from that noble Lord's character-that although his name would have imparted a sanctity, an ornament, and an honor to the bill, we ushered it in without that ceremony, to stand or fall by its own intrinsic merits, neither shielding it under the reputation nor gracing it under the mantle

say that if the aggregate body of this Board determined to use all its power for the purpose of corruption, this House, and the people at large, would have less to dread from them, in the way of influence, than from a few Asiatics who would probably be displaced in consequence of this arrangement-some of whom will return to this country with a million, some with seven hundred thousand, some with five, besides the three or four hundred thousand of others, who are cut off in their career by the hand of Fate. An inundation of such wealth is far more dangerous than any influence that is likely to spring from a plan of government so constituted as this proposed— whether the operation of such a mass of wealth

26 The Commissioners, as named by Mr. Fox when the bill passed the House, were Earl Fitzwilliam, Chairman of the Board, the Honorable Frederick Montague, Lord Lewisham, the Honorable George Augustus North, eldest son of Lord North, Sir Gilbert Elliot, Baronet, Sir Henry Fletcher, Baronet, and Robert Gregory, Esq.

be considered in its probable effects upon the principles of the members of this House, or the manners of the people at large; more especially when a reflection that Orientalists are in general the most exemplary class of people in their morals, and in their deportment the most moderate, and corresponding with the distinction of their high birth and family, furnishes a very reasonable presumption that the expenditure of their money will be much about as honorable as its acquirement.27

I shall now, sir, conclude my speech with a few words upon the opinion of the right honorable gentleman [Mr. Pitt]. He says he will stake his character upon the danger of this bill." I meet him in his own phrase, and oppose him, character to character. I risk my all upon the excellence of this bill. I risk upon it whatever is most dear to me, whatever men most value, the character of integrity, of talents, of honor,

of present reputation and future fame. These, and whatever else is precious to me, I stake upon the constitutional safety, the enlarged policy, the equity, and the wisdom of this measure; and have no fear in saying (whatever may be the fate of its authors) that this bill will produce to this country every blessing of commerce and revenue; and that by extending a generous and humane government over those millions whom the inscrutable destinations of Providence have placed under us in the remotest regions of the earth, it will consecrate the name of England among the noblest of nations.

The vote was carried by a majority of 217 to 103. But when the bill reached the House of Lords, it was met and defeated by the influence of the King, as already mentioned in the sketch of Mr. Fox's life.

SPEECH

OF MR. FOX ON THE USE OF SECRET INFLUENCE TO DEFEAT HIS EAST INDIA BILL, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, DECEMBER 17, 1783.

INTRODUCTION.

ON the ninth of December, 1783, when Mr. Fox's East India Bill went up to the House of Lords, the ministry supposed themselves to possess the fullest evidence that it would pass that body by a decided majority. Within three days, however, rumors were in circulation of some extraordinary movements in the interior of the Court. It was affirmed that Lord Temple was closeted with the King on the eleventh, and that his Majesty had intrusted him with a message of some kind, expressing a strong disapprobation of the bill; which message his Lordship and others were circulating among the peers, and especially among the Lords of the Bedchamber and other members of the royal household who were more immediately connected with the King's person. On the fifteenth, the Duke of Portland, as head of the ministry, alluded to these ramors in the House of Lords. Lord Temple admitted that the interview referred to had taken place, but would neither acknowledge nor deny any thing farther touching the reports in question. It was evident, however, that a powerful impression had been made. Some peers who had given their proxies to the minister or his friends, withdrew them only a few hours before the time appointed for the second reading of the bill; and a letter was at length placed in the hands of the ministry, containing the message of the King which had produced these unexpected results. The substance of this letter is given in the speech below.

In view of these facts, before the bill had been decided upon by the Lords, Mr. Baker moved a resolution in the House of Commons, that "it is now necessary to declare, that to report any opinion or pretended opinion of his Majesty upon any bill or other proceeding depending in either House of Parliament, is a high crime and misdemeanor, derogatory to the honor of the Crown, a breach of the fundamental privileges of Parliament, and subversive of the Constitution of this country." In his remarks on the subject, Mr. Baker divided the criminality into two parts; first, the giving of secret advice to his Majesty; and, secondly, the use that had been made of the King's name for the purpose of influencing the votes of members of Parliament in a matter depending before them. He proved from the journals, that "any reference to the opinions of the King touching a bill before either House had always been judged a high breach of the privileges of Parliament." The motion was seconded by Lord Maitland, and was vehemently opposed by Mr. Pitt, who was a near relative of Lord Temple. Mr. Fox then delivered the following speech, in which he gave full vent to his indignation at the injustice done to ministers and the wound inflicted upon the Constitution by this interference.

SPEECH, &c.'

I did not intend, sir, to have said any thing in addition to that which has been already urged so ably in favor of the resolution now agitated. In 27 The adventurers to India, here called Oriental

ists, such as Paul Benfield, &c., were in most instances persons of no family, and of little worth or education. Hence the sneering terms here used.

my own opinion, its propriety and necessity are completely and substantially established. A few particulars, suggested in the course of the debate by gentlemen on the other side of the House,

1 This speech bas been slightly abridged by omitting a few passages in which the ideas were unnecessarily expanded.

Earl [Lord Temple] is said to have used the name of Majesty with the obvious and express intention of affecting the decisions of the Legis. lature concerning a bill, of infinite consequence to

may be thought, however, to merit some animad- | mon way, and by no inferior agents. A noble version. And, once for all, let no man complain of strong language. Things are now arrived at such a crisis as renders it impossible to speak without warmth. Delicacy and reserve are criminal where the interests of Englishmen are at haz-thirty millions of people, pending in Parliament. ard. The various points in dispute strike to the I tell gentlemen this is not a newspaper surmise, heart; and it were unmanly and pusillanimous to but something much stronger and more serious; wrap up in smooth and deceitful colors objects there is a written record to be produced. This which, in their nature and consequences, are cal-letter [pulling it out of his pocket] is not to be put culated to fill the House and the country with a in the balance with the lie of the day. It states, mixture of indignation and horror.

that "his Majesty allowed Earl Temple to say, This, at least, has made such an impression on that whoever voted for the India Bill were not Greatness of my mind, that I never felt so much anx- only not his friends, but he should consider them the interests iety; I never addressed this House un- as his enemies; and if these words were not involved. der such a pressure of impending mis- strong enough, Earl Temple might use whatever chief; I never trembled so much for public lib- words he might deem stronger, or more to the erty as I now do. The question before the House purpose." Is this parliamentary, or is it truth? involves the rights of Parliament in all their con- Where is the man who dares to affirm the one sequences and extent. These rights are the ba- or deny the other; or to say that he believes in sis of our Constitution, and form the spirit of what- his conscience such a rumor was not calculated ever discriminates the government of a free coun- to produce an immediate effect? It certainly try. And have not these been threatened and as- tended, in the first instance, to vilify, in the grosssaulted? Can they exist a moment in opposition est and most violent manner, the proceedings of to such an interference as that which is supposed Parliament. It says to the public, that we are by the resolution, and has been stated by several not equal to our trust; that we either ignorantly honorable gentlemen to have taken place? No: or willfully betray the interest of our constituents; human nature is not sufficiently perfect to resist and that we are not to be guided in our decisions the weight of such a temptation. When, there- by their convictions or our own, but by that unfore, shall the House assert its dignity, its inde-seen and mysterious authority of which the Sovpendence, its prerogatives, by a resolute and un-ereign, his counselors, and the Legislature, are equivocal declaration of all its legal and constitutional powers, but in the instant of their danger? The disease, sir, is come to a crisis; and now is the juncture which destines the patient to live or die. We are called to sanctify or oppose an absolute extinction of all for which our ancestors struggled and expired. We are called to protect and defend, not only the stipulated franchises of Englishmen, but the sacred privileges of human nature. We are called to protract the ruin of the Constitution. The deliberations of this night must decide whether we are to be free men or slaves; whether the House of Commons be the palladium of liberty or the organ of despotism; whether we are henceforth to possess a voice of our own, or to be only the mechanical echo of secret influence. Is there an individual who feels for his own honor, callous to an appre-spirit and without freedom, instead of limiting, hension of such a consequence as this? Does not every regard which he owes to a body that can not be degraded without his disgrace, that can not expire without involving his fate, rouse his indignation, and excite him to every exertion, both in his individual and delegated capacity, which can reprobate, suspend, or destroy a practice so inimical to public prosperity, as well as hostile to the very existence of this House?

But what is this resolution? It has been Fact of in called, with great technical acuteness, terference. a truism, which seems as incapable of discussion as it is of proof. The foundation of it, however, is a matter of such general and palpable notoriety, as to put every degree of skepticism to defiance. Rumors of a most extraordinary nature have been disseminated in no com

only the blind and passive instruments. Both Houses of Parliament are, consequently, parties in the contest, and reduced, by this unfortunate and wicked device, to the predicament of a man struggling for his life. We are robbed of our rights, with a menace of immediate destruction before our face. From this moment, farewell to every independent measure! Whenever the liberties of the people, the rights of private property, or the still more sacred and invaluable privileges of personal safety, invaded, violated, or in danger, are vindicated by this House, where alone they can be legally and effectually redressed, the hopes of the public, anxious, eager, and panting for the issue, are whispered away, and forever suppressed by the breath of secret influence. A Parliament thus fettered and controlled, without

extends, substantiates, and establishes, beyond all precedent, latitude, or condition, the prerogatives of the Crown. But, though the British House of Commons were so shamefully lost to its own weight in the Constitution, were so unmindful of its former struggles and triumphs in the great cause of liberty and mankind, were so indifferent and treacherous to those primary objects and concerns for which it was originally instituted, I trust the characteristic spirit of this country is still equal to the trial; I trust Englishmen will be as jealous of secret influence as superior to open violence; I trust they are not more ready to defend their interests against foreign depredation and insult than to encounter and defeat this midnight conspiracy against the Constitution.

The proposition of this evening is, therefore,

« ПредишнаНапред »