1807.

Lord Howick

on the goernment

pledge.

as my private opinion went, I did strongly recommend the discontinuance of any such attempt. The impartial measure then under contemplation appeared admirably suited to induce that discontinuance, and that discontinuance was effected. Such, Sir, were our inducements of policy and principle.

But we had also another inducement; we did Continues hope, that the limited measure would not encounter the opposition, to which we well knew the general question was exposed. In reverting to the act of the Irish Parliament of 1793, we found, that a pledge had been given by the highest servants of the Crown, that a similar measure would be brought forward in this country. This was recorded in the Secretary of State's office, by a dispatch from Lord Hobart, in which he distinctly stated the fact. This becoming a question, not of policy alone, but also of good faith, we did hope, that the limited measure might receive the assent and approbation of what, on the more general question, we were aware there was no hope; and which 'general question we therefore studiously avoided. On these grounds, the measure, that I had the honor of introducing into the House, was submitted to his Majesty. A detailed dispatch, which I wish it was in my power to lay upon the table, was written to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, stating explicitly the motives of this measure, and this detailed dispatch was sent to his Majesty, accompanied by a cabinet minister. From that first proposition, his Majesty certainly

expressed a strong dissent. On that dissent hav- 1807. ing been made known to them, the cabinet deliberated, and the result was, a respectable representation to his Majesty of the grounds, on which they thought the measure expedient. To those representations was returned an answer, in which his Majesty, with considerable reluctance, unquestionably signified his assent; certainly with reluctance; but it was a positive assent. Under the sanction of that assent, the dispatch was sent to the Lord Lieutenant. At a conference with some of the Catholics in Ireland, Mr. Elliott, the Secretary of State, informed them of the separate measure, which it was intended to propose. Some discussion ensued; and to a question from a Mr. O'Connor, whether every rank in the army were to be open to the Catholics, or whether they were still to be precluded from the staff, Mr. Elliott's answer was, that as the words of the dispatch implied, that the Catholics would be allowed to hold any commissions in the army, on taking the oath of allegiance, he conceived that the staff was included. A dispatch containing a special account of this conference, was sent to his Majesty's government at home, and soon after a second dispatch, in which it was stated, that the subject had been referred to the consideration of a general meeting of the Catholics, by whom, notwithstanding the doubts, that had been incidentally thrown out, it was understood, that every military - situation was to be rendered accessible to them. These dispatches, Sir, containing these explicit

1807.

I

statements, were sent to his Majesty at Windsor,
and received his most gracious perusal; but no ob-
jection whatever was then made by his Majesty to
the measure, to which they related. However,
subsequently to this period, there certainly did arise
a doubt, whether the measure had been distinctly
understood in its fullest extent. It is only fair to
say, that this doubt originated with some members
of the cabinet. On its being started, I, and some
others, with whom I had the honor to act, were
most anxious, that it should be completely remov-
ed, before the introduction into Parliament.
have always considered, that a minister in Parlia-
ment acts in a double capacity; he acts as a minis-
tér, and hears as an individual member of Parlia-
ment. He may introduce or support a measure
unconnected with government considerations. Such
was the conduct of Mr. Pitt on the propositions
for reform, and for the abolition of the Slave
Trade; the latter of which has, thank God, been at
last effected, and is a measure which, if there were
nothing else to distinguish the late government
during the short period, that it had existed, will
shed on it sufficient lustre. But when a member
of administration introduces any measure as a mea-
sure of government, it is most clearly his duty to
be previously convinced, that he has the concur-
rence of the cabinet, and the sanction of royal
authority. I should, indeed, have thought my-
self reprehensible in the highest degree, and de-
serving of all the foul reproach, that has been so
lavishly bestowed upon me, had I introduced the

measures which I did introduce, without having ascertained, that it had the concurrence of the the cabinet and the sanction of the King.

1807.

particulars

I have before stated, that a doubt sprung up Further with regard to the latter: it was therefore deter- of the dis that I (Lord Spencer being absent on account of patch. ill health) should write a dispatch to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, inclosing those clauses of the bill, in which the proposed measure was contained, and restating, in conformity to the sentiments in the dispatch, which had been sent in answer to the communication of Mr. Elliott's conference, that every commission in the army was to be open to the Catholics. This dispatch I wrote with as much clearness, as it was in my power to do. With these clauses it went to the King on Monday. On Tuesday it returned from Windsor, without the slightest hint of objection on the part of his Majesty; and as I had been accustomed to do, on receiving the royal sanction, I immediately forwarded the dispatch to Ireland. In the mean time objections were stated, merely in point of form, to the mode of proceeding in this measure 'by clauses in the Mutiny Bill, and on a full reconsideration of the subject, it was thought better to introduce a separate bill. On Wednesday I attended the levee at St. James's, and had my usual audience of his Majesty. After that audience, his Majesty enquired, what business was going forward that day in the House of Commons? I replied, that the Mutiny Bill was to pass through one of its stages, and explained to his Majesty the

1807.

feasons, which had induced me to embody the clauses for allowing the Catholic's admission into the army and navy in a separate bill.

His Majesty approved of the change, and then asked me, whether the bill were the same as the Irish bill of 1793? I stated in what the difference consisted; observing, that it had been fully detailed in the various dispatches previously submitted to his Majesty's inspection. Here, Sir, I must acknowledge, that his Majesty did express a general dislike and disapprobation of the measure; but not in such a manner, as to induce me to conclude, that the reluctant assent originally given by his Majesty was withdrawn, and that I was not empowered to introduce the bill. What confirmed me in my opinion was, was, that my Lord Grenville had a subsequent audience with his Majesty, in which his Majesty did not make a single observation on the bill. Thursday or Friday (I do not recollect which) I introduced this bill into the House. During the whole of a week, although I had various communications with his Majesty on other subjects, his Majesty did not make the slightest objection to this bill, nor was any intimation on the subject Jeceived from his Majesty, untill the Wednesday following; at which time I was precluded from attending my duty in this House by a family calamity, when his Majesty stated decidedly his objections to any extension of the provisions of the Irish act of 1793. From that moment, we were convinced, that his Majesty had misunderstood the subject; or rather, I was convinced, that I had

On