Volume I Part 16 (1/2)

Pall Mall, Thursday, March 6th, 1783.

My dear Brother,

You will very naturally have expected, long before this, to have heard of the establishment of some new system of Government, upon the ruins of that which is now avowedly broke up in every part of it. Still, however, the country remains, at this urgent and critical moment, wholly without any Government whatsoever.

When all hopes were over of forming an Administration from the remains of Lord Shelburne's, acting under some other head, the King sent, as I imagined he would, for Lord North; having previously had some communication with him through Lord Guilford, whom he saw on Sunday. Lord North has been twice with the King, and has both times been pressed to form some system to the exclusion of the Duke of Portland and Fox, which he has peremptorily refused; alleging the necessity of strength, and the impossibility of supporting Government in Parliament, except on the basis of their coalition. The last time, the conference is said to have ended with his being told, that if _he_ was determined, he would find that the person who talked to him could be so likewise. In the meantime, Parliament is kept sitting, and must be so; because Fox declares his resolution not to suffer the Mutiny Bill to pa.s.s till a Government is formed.

In this state of things, it is difficult to do any business whatever; because those who hold their situations only for the moment, are of course disinclined to take any step beyond the mere routine of office. I have, however, prevailed upon Townshend to speak to the King about the Peers to be created previous to the ----. I enclose my note to him upon the subject, and his answer.

The Irish Bill stood for yesterday, and as it had been so often put off, I thought it better not to delay it any longer.

Accordingly, I moved to go into the Committee. (Neville in the Chair, Lord Nugent peremptorily refusing, and Jemmy not being well.)

Before we went into the Committee, Percival desired to say, that as he understood his idea had not been approved of by the House in general, and that every one seemed to wish that this Bill might pa.s.s without any division or difference of opinion, he should not now insist upon it, though he was not convinced that the motion was improper.

Mr. Eden said, that the principle of the Bill met his hearty concurrence; though he wished to observe that the clause about the judicature seemed to him so worded, as to declare that England never had the right of appellant judicature, which was not the case.

Lord Newhaven said, he saw no reason for not inserting the clause, and he should, therefore, move an instruction to the Committee, to receive a clause to prevent any treason, or mis-prision of treason, committed in Ireland, from being inquired of or tried in Great Britain.

Lord Lucan seconded him.

Lord Nugent objected to this. He said that, originally, when attempts had been made in the House of Commons in favour of Ireland, no man had been a more eager or strenuous supporter of them than himself. But now, ever since he had seen the disposition of this country favourable to Ireland, and that it was the sincere wish of all Englishmen to adopt the most liberal principles on that subject, he had thought that it became more proper for persons connected with Ireland to remain silent, and to leave the measures in favour of that country to be carried through by Englishmen. In the present instance, he wished that the clause in question had not been proposed, because it was attended with more difficulty than the n.o.ble Lord seemed to be aware of. The Act of Henry VIII., which had been referred to, had been adopted and confirmed as an Irish Act by the Parliament of that country. This being the case, the repeal of the English Act could have no effect whatever, because the Irish statute would still remain un-repealed, and could only be removed by the Parliament of Ireland; whilst, on the other hand, we should be to take away a law which had been so much approved by Ireland as to be by them adopted.

Mr. Herbert read the Irish statute alluded to, and said that the disposition towards Ireland which appeared in every part of the House, could not but inspire that country with every sentiment of affection to Great Britain.

I then said, that if the motion made by the n.o.ble Lord was persisted in, I should most undoubtedly not oppose it, because it was impossible for me to give opposition to any measure which had even the appearance of adding strength to the exclusive rights of Ireland; that I was of opinion myself that the jurisdiction in question was not, by any means whatever, conveyed by the Act referred to; that the statute of Henry VIII.

was not intended to affect any part of the King's dominions was clear to a demonstration, from the subsequent statute of the same King in explanation of it--the preamble of which, referring to the former Act, does expressly speak of treasons committed out of this realm, _and other the King's dominions_; and that the circ.u.mstance of the adoption of the former Act by the Irish Parliament was a clear proof that it was not considered as an Act which could bind Ireland; and I could not help wis.h.i.+ng that the n.o.ble Lord would withdraw his motion, for the reason stated by the n.o.ble Lord (Lord Nugent), that we could not repeal an Irish Act; and that without so doing, the repeal of the English statute (even if it did give any jurisdiction) would be nugatory. Besides this, there was another reason. The framers of this Bill had certainly never supposed that it could go to remove at once every difficulty which might arise, and to settle at once every point which might require to be settled when, as in the present case, a great stream was turned into a new channel. Our idea went to the unequivocal and permanent establishment of those points which were in the contemplation of Government last year, to those things to which Parliament then intended to pledge, and to which I had ever been of opinion they had inviolably pledged the faith of the nation. That by so doing, we conceived we should establish a foundation of confidence, upon which all less important points might be adjusted with mutual temper, harmony and affection; that Ireland could certainly entertain no doubt that the same principles which had guided us in the great and extensive considerations would continue to actuate our conduct in those of less concern and more confined regulation; (that in the present case, if the English Act was a grievance to Ireland, so also would the Irish be to England.)[1] At the same time, however, I begged that it might be clearly understood that this clause was not objected to on the ground of its being a new claim on the part of Ireland.

Ireland had last year, in the Addresses of her Parliament, claimed to be a distinct and independent kingdom. If, therefore, this Act affected her independence--and in that light it was objected to--so far it certainly was not in any respect a new claim. To supreme legislation and supreme judicature, all criminal jurisdiction was certainly annexed and inseparable.

Lord Newhaven then withdrew his motion.

Percival said, that the exercise of this jurisdiction had been antecedent to the Act of Henry VIII.

In the Committee, Lord Beauchamp objected to the word established, which he wished to alter to the word recognized; but that, unless it was agreed to, he would not press it.

I said that, as every word of the Bill had undergone the most serious discussion, and the most attentive consideration, on both sides of the water, and that as the present form had been approved of, I wished the Bill might receive no alteration, in order that it might pa.s.s, without any possible difference of opinion, in any part of the House.

He then proposed to put for ever instead of for the future; to which I agreed.

To the last clause, to prevent the receiving writs of error, &c., I moved an addition, which was drawn by the Attorney-General in consequence of the enclosed papers from Mr.

Travers. I enclose also a letter to him, which I wish you would let Bernard or Cooke copy, and send to him, with a copy of the clause in question.

Upon the whole, the business has gone off better than I expected; though I take it for granted that we shall hear again, both of the criminal judicature and of the _recognition_. Pitt offered to state the objections at large to the latter; but I thought it better not.

Lord Bellamont has written a letter in the newspapers about the criminal judicature, which I suppose you have seen. I saw him in the House, and told him the part I meant to take. He said he wished it had been inserted in the Bill, but hoped at least that I would guard against the idea of its being called a new claim.

To this you will see that part of my speech was directed; and for that reason, as well as on account of the miserable statement of it in the papers of to-day, I wish that you would revise and publish it in the Irish newspapers.