for entering into negociation on the basis proposed in that overture; where by alone it could have been discovered, whether there did or did not exist a possibility of effecting, through the means of negociation (combined with the unremitted and powerful assistance which his Majesty was enabled to give to the Spanish nation), the rescue of Spain and Portugal from the usurpation of France, and whether peace was indeed utterly unattainable.

Mr. Ponsonby opposed the amend

ment of his honourable friend. The

unfeigned respect he bore his hon. friend, called upon him to state his reasons for differing from him, as he did almost wholly upon the present question. The question, in his opinion, could be reduced to a much narrower compass than his honourable friend seemed to think it did not go into the wide detail of foreign relations. The question for the house was, whether on the papers now before them, it appeared that his Majesty's ministers in their conduct in the late overtures, acted right or wrong, when the overture for peace was first made by France? Was it, or was it not, for ministers to demand a quick explanation with respect to the admission of Spain as a party to the treaty? He thought it was. He again differed from his honourable friend, as to the stress Jaid by him on the probable consequence of the high tone in which we answered their overtures; he did not believe any tone, however moderate, would have had the least effect on this negociation; not that he approved of the tone used by the right honourable gentleman; far from it; he thought the language and the stile adopted by the right hon. gentleman, more like what one political adversary would use te another in that house, than what became the gravity of diplomatic correspondence. He was inclined to think that in point of time, the crisis was most unfavourable to negociation; for Bonaparte, on the 5th of September, had declared that it

was not for the interest of France that any of the Bourbon family should reign in Spain, and that it was safer for France that the same dy nasty should reign in both countries. His senate, in their answer, said that his views were wise, and that the war with Spain was politic, just, and necessary. Can it be then said, that a more moderate toned negociation would have had a better chance of success? Besides, he did think that by not demanding that Spain in the first instance should be admitted as a party, we should have abandoned her in the face of the world.

Mr. Croker bore testimony to the loyalty of the Roman catholics of Ireland, but hoped that the asmade the text on which to preach sertion of Bonaparte would not be the catholic emancipation.

General Mathew was not afraid of the cry of jacobinism, however much it might be the system of gen tlemen on the other side, to hold it out as an object of terror. The noble lord opposite, whom he had the honour to call his countryman, and also the honourable gentleman who had spoken last, knew practically in the year 1798 and 1799, in what jacobinism consisted. He defied any man to say that the catholics of Ireland were rebels. The person who should presume to say so did not deserve to live, but to die by the hands of the common executi

oner.

He asserted that it was false, and that no communication, good, bad, or indifferent, had taken place between them and the French since the year 1796, when Arthur O'Con

nor met with Hoche on the borders of Switzerland. The right honourable gentleman talked of atrocities

-never had more atrocities been committed by the most desperate despot than by the British government! Of all despots the British government had been the worst. How they dealt with kings whom they wish

ed to dethrone, his honourable friend (Sir A.Wellesley) could inform them. In the East they did not merely imprison kings THEY MURDERED THEM! He saw a gentleman in the house who was secretary of state in Ireland, in the year 1798. He could tell the house what was then the situation of Ireland. Here the Speaker member to order. line of conduct to

called the hon. This was not the be pursued in a question of the kind now before the house.

General Mathew said other members had introduced Ireland, and the catholics of Ireland were alluded to in the papers before the house. He would tell Earl Camden, if there ever was tyranny in any country, it was in Ireland under the administration of that noble lord!

The Speaker again called the hon. member to order.

General Mathew said, then he must give up the year 1798, the scalping, and all the rest.-Being again called to order, he observed, that the best thing he could do was to sit down.

Sir Francis Burdett said, that on addresses proposed to be voted to his Majesty, he understood it to be as a matter of right in any member to enter into a discussion of the general interests of the country. It might be disagreeable to the cars of Englishmen to hear the perilous situation of their country described; to have enumerated a train of occurrences more calamitous and improvident, probably, than had ever disgraced any nation on the face of the globe; but still had he not been instructed by the superior judgment of the Speaker, he should have been of opinion that the honourable member who spoke last, had he not waved the right, was entitled to have proceeded, and might fairly have introduced any parallel instances of atrocity, when told, on the other side, that the act of the Emperor of

the French, by which this country was precluded from listening fo his overtures for peace, was an instance of the most unparalleled atrocity which had ever disgraced any country. He felt no pleasure in recalling to the recollection of the house the calamities and burdens under which the people of this country groaned. He did not wish them to look back at what was past, but with the recollection of past occurrences in their minds,to look forward to what yet remained, and to consider well that a continuance in similar courses might ultimately prove fatal to this land. Whatever were

the merits of Bonaparte, which, unquestionably would not be fairly discussed in that house, it would, at least, be allowed, that he knew the best means of accomplishing the objects he had in view. Having, then, received from him a taunt as to an unprotected part of our dominions, let us take the hint, and by an act of our own render a repetition of the taunt unnecessary. It had been said, that heat a fool in a mortar with a pestle, he would never quit his folly; we had been beat in a mortar for many years, but what had we got but disgrace? If we were to assist the Spaniards it was the duty of ministers to see that there was a rational hope of attaining our end, In his opinion there was not any such rational expectation.--The absurdity of acting on the divine right of kings had been the misfortune of this reign! In support of it we had made an unavailing waste of blood and treasure, but we had never yet embarked in any legitimate object. We were now smarting under the effects of the war with America, and the burdens with which we were loaded by the corrupt ministers of those days. It suited the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Canning) to night to say, that the internal government of a country should not be interfered with. How did this doctrine accord

with the idea of the contest in which for the last 15 years, we had been engaged with the French, simply because they chose to alter their internal form of government? INSTEAD OF A MONUMENT TO THE

MEMORY OF THE MINISTER WHO INVOLVED US IN SUCH A WAR,

HE DESERVED ΤΟ HAVE LOST HIS HEAD ON THE SCAFFOLD! In addition to the other losses our armies in Spain had sustained, he thought that the life of the gallant officer who commanded the expedition to have been too dearly sold for Ferdinand the VIIth. If he was tightly informed, there were bulle tins in town, in which, notwithstanding the acrimony of the French ruler, he does ample justice to the bravery of our army and its gallant commander. He could not believe that men who, like our present ministers, could see no merit in an enemy, were fit to rule over a generous people. He begged, however, to disclaim the idea of being the advocate of Bonaparte. As to the general state of the war in Spain, unless ministers proceeded on the fact of the known enthusiasm of the country-if they presumed to take that information on light grounds, they had been guilty of a crime of the deepest magnitude, being a course calculated above all others to produce the greatest calamities. In addition to accurate information on this subject, they should have been able to see that there would be 300,000 men in arms-that all the passes were secured-and that they would be able to fight with every advantage, not subject to want of food, and that they would only have to fall, if they did fall, in the field of glory. If these things could not be ensured, then their duty was not to have landed a single man, but to have supplied the Spaniards with arms and other necessaries, which might have produced a prolongation of the war. These were

the only two rational plans of proceeding; instead of which ministers contented themselves with sending only such a body of men as was sufficient to prevent disgrace to our arms, which the valour of our army could itself effect, but not enough to save the nation from an aching heart. They presumed, too, to trust the British character and honour on the rotten plank of the Spanish government, not excepting even the inquisition. They had no right to do so; there was no necessity for doing it.

With respect to sending money to the Spaniards, it would have well become ministers, before they called for a supply from the exhausted pockets of the people, to have restored the millions of which Spain had been some years ago unjustly pillaged by the government of this country, and which had gone to his Majesty under the name of droits of admiralty! This would only have been a restitution of their own property; and while it aided the Spaniards, would have cleared the character of this country, and confirmed our former assertion, that we had seized on their money principally to prevent its going into the hands of Bonaparte. He confessed he would prefer to the amendment now proposed, an address to his Majesty, requesting that he would order an inquiry into the grievances of which the public had to complain, and that as an earnest of the refor mation of abuses, he would dismiss his present ministers from his presence and councils. The house was called on for an address of thanks, He,, for one, had no thanks to bestow; kings were too much exposed to have adulation poured into their ear. It was the cause of the overthrow of too many of the thrones of Europe. We had not heard that any of the kings who had of late years fallen under the dominion of Bonaparte, were in want of courtiers. It was fit that the King of England should occasionnally hear

the truth from his commons, and no better opportunity than the present could possibly present itself. The secretary of state had objected to the idea of this being a sinking country. He (Mr. Canning) might be rising, but the country was sinking. He (Sir F. Burdett) was of that opinion, and there was too much ground to believe it would sink still lower, if a reform did not speedily take place!

the intentions of the French Emperor could have been altered.

After a few words by way of explanation from Mr. Canning, Lord H. Pelty, and Sir F. Burdett, the motion for the address was agreed to without a division.

Mr. Perceval in a short speech moved for leave to bring in a bill for continuing the act of last session until 40 days after the cominencement of the next sessions, leaving it at the discretion of the crown to sus

Lord Porchester, while he agreed with his honourable friend (Mr. Whitbread) in many observations, deprecated the idea of this being a a sinking country, or that there was any necessity of shewing an anxiety to inter into negociations for peace. Lord H. Petty was satisfied that no peace was to have been expected from the overtures at Erfurth, but on the abandonment of Spain; and that it was by arms, and not by negociation, that the fate of Spain was to be decided. Our character with Spain was still to be gained, and if we wished to inspire Spain with a belief that we meant to make an exertion in her favour, our conduct should have been in unison with our declaration, and not calculated to raise any doubt in their minds as to our sincerity, or that we meant to bring the cause of Spain into our market. With regard to the observations so eloquently urged by the honourable baronet (Sir F. Burdett) as to the propriety of taking part in the cause of Spain, whether that was right or wrong, we had already made our election - our part was chosen, and an abandonment of it

would have been alike detrimental to our honour and our interest. His lordship deprecated the tone of insult in which the answer of the right honourable gentleman (Mr. Canning) was conceived; but at the same time he did not see any mode by which

Wednesday, Feb. 1.

Sir A. Wellesley obtained leave to bring in a bill for allowing a certain enlist into the regular service. proportion of the militia of Ireland to

Brig.-Gen. Fane was presented with the thanks of the house, for his conduct at Rolea and Vimiera, in Portugal; aud Brig.-Gens. M'Kenzie, Frazer, and Fane, and Sir S. Hood, received the thanks of the house, for their good conduct at Corunna.

Mr. Wardle having moved the order of the day for a committee of the whole house, to investigate the conduct of his Royal Highness the Duke of York, the Speaker left the chair, and, on the motion of Mr. Wardle, Mr. Wharton was called to preside in the committee,

Mr. Wardle then stated, that he had ordered a general list of his witnesses to be transmitted to the commander in

chief, thus giving his royal highness every advantage in his power, and the means of knowing the grounds on which he

meant to proceed. All he had done

was to offer himself as accuser of the

royal duke on grounds which had come to his knowledge, and from reports which ought not to pass unnoticed in that house, nnd which, if true, called loudly for their interference. Much been said of the licentiousness of the had been said of jacobinism, much had press, and of a conspiracy against the family of Brunswick, but nothing that he had stated had any connection with the press. He had neither taken up reports circulated through the medium of the press, nor employed the press in his accusation of the royal duke. He

answers to which went to prove, that Dr. Thynne had attended Mrs. Clarke for the last seven years; that he ap plied to her in consequence of an appli cation from Mr. Robert Knight, the brother of Col. Knight; that he told her he was authorised to say that she would receive a sum of money on the exchange being effected, and specified, the sum of 2001.; that it was in consequence of her connection with a certain great personage that he made the application to her; and that Mrs. Clarke sent to his house the gazette annour.cing the exchange, though no money passed through his hands; and he sent the gazette to the parties concerned.

should rather think, that if it were possible for such a description of persons us jacobins to exist in this country, they would prefer a conduct opposite to his. In pursuit of their object, they would think it wiser to let corruption flourish until it had undermined and destroyed every branch of the constitution. What was his object, but to stop and check its baneful influence, and by its extinction to save the country. There was an assertion of an hon, and learned gentleman (Mr. Adam) calculated to make an impression on that house, unfavourable to the statements respecting the commander in chief, that he (Mr. W.) had offered to its consideration. It was asserted by him, that from a minute acquaintance for 20 years with the affairs of the commander in chief, it was impossible that such transactions could have taken place without his knowledge notwithstanding that assertion, he took upon himself to prove by evidence unquestionable, either at the bar of that house, or before any other tribunal, that pecuniary transactions to an enor mous amount did take place without that learned gentleman's knowledge, the very discovery of which led to the breach between the commander in chief and the lady whom he should subsequently call to their bar, who was then under the protection of the commander in chief. He had nothing more to add, but relying on the honour and dignity of that house, to call his witnesses, although he was aware that with many of its members the illustrious personage accused had a much more direct interest. The first witness whom he should call was Dr. Andrew Thynne, and, before he proceeded to his examination he begged leave to say that he was with that transaction accidentally connected. He felt it his duty to say so, lest any unfavourable impression may go abroad agamst that respectable character.

The examination of Mr. Robert Knight went to prove, that he desired Dr. Thynne, of Berners-street, to use his influence with Mrs. Clarke, in order to have his brother, Colonel Knight's exchange carried into effect; that he authorised him to hold out to that lady a pecuniary acknowledginent for her services on the occasion, to the amount of 2001.; that, after the exchange was effected, he sent her 2001 by his servant, in bank notes, under a blank cover; that he saw Mrs. Clarke soon after the notice of his brother's exchange appeared in the gazette, and thanked her for her service; and that she requested him to preserve secresy, lest it should come to the Duke of York's ears.

Mr. Yorke said, that in his observations on Friday, he meant not the slightest imputation on the conduct of Mr. Wardle.

The examination of Mary Anne Clarke went to prove that she resided in Gloucester place, in a house belonging to the Duke of York, in 1805; that she lived under the protection of his royal highness at that time; that Dr. Thynne applied to her, for the purpose of obtaining her services, m order to effect an exchange for Lieut. Col. Knight; that he urged as a reason for the application, that great dispatch was wished for in obtaining the ex change; that Dr. Thynne held out the offer of a pecuniary compliment if the exchange was effected through her influence; that he mentioned something about a couple of hundred pounds; that Dr. Thynne told her that Lieut. Colonel Knight had been long endeavouring to get the exchange, for the expediting of which he applied to her; that on being thus applied to, she afterwards applied to the commander in chief on the sube ject; that she stated the case as it had been mentioned to her, and gave his royal highness, one day after dinner, a

Mr. Wardle then stated, that he should first take up the charge relative to the exchange of Colonel Knight with Col. Brooke, but before calling any witness, it would be necessary to read the exchange as gazetted at the time, which being done, Dr. Thynne appeared at the bar, when Mr. Wardle put to him a number of questions; the