« PreviousContinue »
Death of Mr. Pitt. Change of Ministry. In consequence of the death of Mr. Pitt, which occurred on the 23d of January, a complete change of Ministers took place. The following are the lists of the respective administrations. Pitt- Administration, as it stood in January, 1806.
Cabinet Ministers. Earl Camden
President of the Council Lord Eldon
Lord High Chancellor Earl of Westmoreland
Lord Privy Seal
First Lord of the Treasury and Right Hon. William Pitt
Chancellor of the Exchequer,
(Prime Minister) Lord Barham
First Lord of the Admiralty Earl of Chatham
Master-General of the Ordnance Lord Hawkesbury
Secretary of State for the Home
Department Lord Mulgrave
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
Secretary of State for the DepartLord Viscount Castlereagh
ment of War and the Colonies, and President of the Board of
Control for the Affairs of India Lord Harrowby
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lan
Not of the Cabinet.
Secretary at War
Joint Paymasters of His Majesty's
Secretaries of the Treasury
Master of the Rolls
Attorney-General Sir Vicary Gibbs
Solicitor-General Persons in the Ministry of Ireland. Earl of Hardwicke
Lord Lieutenant Lord Redesdale
Lord High Chancellor Right Hon. Charles Long
Chancellor of the Exchequer
Fox-Administration, as it stood in April, 1806.
Secretary of State for the Home Department, Earl Spencer
Ditto for Foreign Affairs, Right Hon. Charles James Fox
Ditto 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
[The above formed the Cabinet.]
IRISH CLERGY RESIDENCE BILL.
March 13. 1806.
DR. DUIGENAN moved the order of the day..for going into a
committee on the Irish Clergy Residence Bill, which being read accordingly,
Mr. GRATTAN rose to express his hope, that the honourable and learned doctor would not now persist in pushing forward this bill through the House with so much rapidity in the absence of gentlemen from that country, who certainly wished to be present at the discussion of a subject of so much importance to the clergy of Ireland : some of those gentlemen had not yet arrived in London ; others were arrived, but not present. Several of them had instructed him to request the learned doctor would postpone the committal of the bill until Thursday, the 8th of May, and he hoped the learned doctor would have no objection.
Dr. Duigenan wished the honourable gentleman would be so good as to give him some reason, why he desired the further proceedings of the bill to be postponed to so distant a day. He had brought the bill forward at the request of the Board of First Fruits in Ireland, a board composed of the Lord Chancellor, the three chief Judges of the other courts, and many of the most respectable gentlemen of Ireland. He should be glad to hear what objections could exist to the bill now before the House.
Mr. Grattan answered, that his first objection was, that a bill of this nature, in which not only the church but the state in Ireland might be eventually involved, should pass in the absence of those gentlemen who represent Ireland, and who must feel a material interest in the ecclesiastical establishment of that country, and who could not possibly attend in their places in that house until after the assizes. If it was desired that he should offer any further reasons, he must be obliged, very reluctantly, to trespass on the time of the House at
eater length; but the House would have to impute that to the curiosity of the learned doctor, and not to any wish of his. His first additional objection then was, that the bill had not yet been debated, and this he conceived a strong objection. Secondly, the statement of the learned doctor, that this bill was exactly, word for word, the same with the act which had passed some sessions ago, for enforcing the residence of the English clergy; whereas the circumstances of both countries differed so materially from each other, that the measure, which might be extremely right in the one, would be very wrong in the other. To use a very homely simile, it would be like the case of a tailor, who, having made a garment exactly fitting one man, should propose it to be worn by another whom it fitted in no respect; and really the proposition of the learned doctor to impose regulations on the clergy of Ireland, which were locally and circumstantially adapted only to the clergy of this country, was rather the argument of a bad tailor than that of a profound statesman. In many parishes of Ireland there were no parishioners to whom a clergyman could minister ; and therefore it must be totally unnecessary to enforce the residence of an incumbent, so long as a parish continued to be so circumstanced; nor çould the analogy between the cases of both countries justify the necessity of similar regulations upon this ground. The learned doctor had mentioned the Irish Board of First Fruits, as his authority for bringing forward this bill: a board certainly composed of persons to whom he (Mr. Grattan) wished to pay every degree of deference and respect : but not one of those persons had a right to sit or vote in the House of Commons, consequently their authority in that place ought to have no deliberate influence. The learned doctor, by possibility, might be extremely right in bringing forward this bill : he would not, at this moment, enter into that part of the discussion: he wanted only to give the learned doctor time and opportunity to prove, by fair argument, to the satisfaction of those who would feel most interested in the bill, that it was just and necessary. There was one clause, at least he understood it so, that made the residence of the clergymen to depend upon the mandate of the bishop. But he could not exactly approve the principle of enforcing residence for just such time as the discretion of the bishop should deem it fit to appoint. Besides, the exercise of this discretion might be rendered in some cases extremely oppressive: in the case, for instance, of an old clergyman who might be induced to give his vote for a member of Parliament at an election contrary to the mandate of his diocesan. If there were such persons as political bishops in Ireland, (he would not assume to say there were,) the consequence of such an act of disobedience might be to force the old clergyman to a residence in a parish where he had no glebe, and perhaps could not find a single house in which he could live, and be remote from his friends, and out of the reach of every comfort or accommodation. At present he did not wish to urge any thing further ; but hoped he had said enough to convince the House, that the law which was very well calculated to operate in England might be, in many instances, quite the reverse in Ireland; and that a measure calculated to operate in Ireland was entitled to some consideration and discussion from gentlemen who must have more knowledge and experience in the local circumstances of that country; the bill for a similar purpose in this country had occupied, for a succession of days, the most minute attention in both Houses of Parliament.
Mr. Fox agreed with Mr. Grattan in the necessity of postponing the proceedings on the bill, until a full attendance of the Irish gentlemen should take place. Dr. Duigenan however persisted in his motion, and the House was going to divide, when he was at length induced to postpone the committal.
MR. WINDHAM'S BILL FOR LIMITED SERVICE IN THE ARMY.
June 2. 1806.
MR. WINDHAM (secretary) moved the order of the day, for
the House to go into a committee on the Mutiny Bill. The House having resolved itself into the committee, and the question
for filling up the blanks in the form of the oath to be taken by the soldiers hereafter to be enlisted, with the number seven being put, Lord Castlereagh objected to limiting the period of service. He contended that, if the bill passed, it would no longer be possible to raise men for a longer term than the period of seven years ; this would abridge the power of the Crown, and would fail in the object, for men would prefer to enlist for life, than for a term of years. To
prove this, he quoted some instances, where men had accepted the higher bounty for enlisting for life, in preference to a lesser bounty for a short period : he contended that the nature of the service would be impaired, as well as the prerogative of the Crown.
Mr. GRATTAN, in reply, spoke as follows: I think the noble lord (Castlereagh) might have been more moderate in his strictures on this plan, when some plan is confessedly necessary, and neither the noble lord nor any of his associates have any plan to offer. Something calculated to recruit our military force was, on all hands, allowed to be desirable; and the only question was, what plani was most likely to attain the object which all professed a wish to promote. Several recommended a reliance on the ordinary recruiting alone, which, it was now evident, could not be conducted without high bounties; but the opinion of the majority, with whom I certainly concur, is, that limited service should be resorted to. Much encouragement to act upon this opinion is to be derived from experience. Notwithstanding the assertion of the noble lord, that all experience was against the experiment of the Right Hon. Secretary, I assert the contrary For in the American war 78,000, men were raised upon terms of limited service; and such a number serve to show that these terms were not likely to be ineffective; these terms have, in fact, always proved productive; and they were so in the last French war. But how did the gentlemen opposite succeed in the operation of those measures, in the support of which the noble lord himself was so forward? What were the Army of Reserve and the Additional Force Acts, but measures of limited service? — thus the unreality of their argument is proved by experience, and by their own conduct.
According to the plan proposed by the honourable member, great advantages are held out to the soldier ; besides the limited period, the veteran now is to receive, at the end of seven years, an advance of pay; at the end of fourteen years, a further advance; and, finally, an enlarged pension. Am I then to understand, that, without these advantages, he was reconciled to the disparity of condition, but that under these advantages it becomes intolerable? The seaman too, he bore this disparity; and further, another disparity, pressing; he too has received advantages, and now