the consideration of this question a strong desire on the part of some to go to law. Now, certainly, if this expression was meant to apply to the lawyers who had been retained in the case, it was an offensive one. It was, in that event, as much offensive as it would be to say that the Duke of Wellington, being a great captain himself, was for our going to war; the inference being that war would be profitable to him. But the other part of this letter seemed to show that no such reflection was intended; and that the passage applied not to the lawyers, but to those who employed them; for it imported "that there was

to be no reference to counsel or attornies, except on points previously referred to their decision."

Mr. Brougham was much obliged to his noble friend for taking the trouble to give this explanation to the house; but be could assure him the words would not bear any such construction. This prohibition to refer to the counsel and attornies, though accompanied by such an exception, was of a dangerous nature. There were some seven of them in all; and he must say that he wondered at such a regulation levelled by two members of the government against men, among whom was a gentleman whom he had the pleasure of knowing very well-a most eminent and respectable solicitor, the founder of the Pitt club. Now, to be sure this club, calling itself after Mr. Pitt, did in fact reject all the old Pittites; and under a peculiar sort of notion of the matter, admitted none but those whose principles were really contrary to the principles of Mr. Pitt. Still this gen

tleman was the oldest member of the Pitt club; and to him no imputation like that thrown out in the letter could apply; for, not to mention that in a business so extensive as his was, a single additional cause would be mere moonshine, it did so happen that in this case of the Deccan prize-money it would be more lucrative to him not to go to law at all, but to have the undisturbed management of his clients' interests in the distribution.

Sir R. Fergusson must say that his hon. and gallant friend had used some language on this occasion which he (Sir R. Fergusson) could not feel to be proper. Whatever his hon. and gallant friend might think of the letter, there was a great difference in point of the notion conveyed to men's minds between the phrase of " the said W. Harrison," and "the said Mr. W. Harrison." That the hon. and gallant gentleman, conceiving that a friend of his-and such a friend, too, as the Duke of Wellington-had been spoken of disrespectfully, should be betrayed into some degree of warmth, was perfectly natural; but now that he perceived the hon. and learned gentleman (Dr. Lushington) had spoken upon a former night in reference to the phrase in print, which was this day proved, however, to be incorrectly printed, he (Sir R. Fergusson) did trust the hon. and gallant member would be prevailed on to express his regret for any excess of warmth that he might have been led into. In giving this advice, he begged to assure the hon. and gallant gentleman, that he never could advise an hon, friend like himself, and more especially one who belonged

longed to the same service with himself, to any course of proceeding that might in the slightest degree be derogatory to his character. On the contrary, he was now suggesting exactly what he would suggest, under similar circumstances, to his own brother.

Sir H. Hardinge declared, that really if any hon. gentleman would undertake to point out to him a single unparliamentary expression that he had employed, he would not hesitate a moment to retract it, and express even his regret for it. Whether, however, the Duke of Wellington, in this letter, had made use of the words "William Harrison," or "Mr. William Harrison," it could afford no justification of the term " insolent," as applied to that letter. That was a word, as he apprehended, altogether indefensible.

The Speaker said, that he rose with the double purpose of bearing his testimony, to the best of his recollection, as to what had really been said; and at the same time of apologizing to the house for the great omission of which he had been guilty, if he was wrong in supposing that nothing unparliamentary had fallen from the hon, and gallant officer. Now his impression was to that effect; and had it been different, he (the speaker) would have been unpardonable for neglecting to interrupt the hon. member at the time. The hon. member had just expressed his entire willingness to retract any thing unparliamentary that might have fallen from him; and by so doing he had done himself the highest honour, and no more than justice to the house, as well as to himself (the speaker), if he might be permitted to say so,

because he then intimated a belief that the speaker would have apprized the house of any disorderly observations had he been conscious of them.

Mr. Peel submitted that the

unconsciousness of any hon. gentleman that he was giving offence by any observations was a sufficient apology in respect of those observations.

Dr. Lushington hoped that he was the last man in the house to take offence unreasonably at any observations made there. As he understood the hon. and gallant officer, the epithet "insolent," which had been called in question, had been retorted by him on his (Dr. Lushington's) conduct; and that, he did think, was going a little too far on the part of any hon. member. If the hon. and gallant officer, however, would acknowledge that he had not intended any offence to him (Dr. Lushington) beyond retorting an expression upon him, if he had used it, and which he (Dr. Lushington) now disclaimed having used; and if the hon. and gallant gentleman was therefore content to retract such epithet as applied to him, he (Dr.Lushington) should feel perfectly satisfied.

Sir H. Hardinge assented to this understanding.

Mr. Canning moved that this house, at its rising, do adjourn until Tuesday next.-Agreed to.

Mr. Brougham wished to asked the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Canning) a question upon a very important subject, which, however, he had abstained during the whole session from broaching, for no other reason except the great disinclination he had felt to abstract the attention of the go

vernment

vernment from any negotiations that might be going on between Great Britain and France, or France and Spain, respecting the abandonment of Spain by the French army. He had been fearful also, by any untimely inquiries, of doing possibly mischief to some most gallant and illustrious persons who were pining under confinement in that country (Spain), as noble victims who had endured every suffering, and the loss of every thing dearest on earth to man, save their honour, which alone came out of tribulation more pure and beautified than it was before its trial. The release of these individuals from their captivity would be the best act which our interference possibly could now effect; and would reflect the greatest credit upon, he would not say, but would be the easiest reparation to be made by, the wrong doer.

Mr. Canning said, the hon. and learned gentleman might take it for granted that this was a matter to which the attention of government had been all along most anxiously directed, and which was of too grave importance to have escaped his most vigilant observation. He had received, as well from the government of Spain as that of France, the strongest assurances that not a single day would be lost in effecting the evacuation at the earliest possible period; and not the slightest opposition was manifested to the measure on the part of that army. He understood from the French government that France had at present a force of 22,000 men in Spain, which would be withdrawn about the month of April; and an extraordinary corps, distinct from

that force, of 10,000 men, which Spain (if we rightly gathered the right hon. gentleman's meaning) proposed to retain. Now he did firmly believe, that the hon. and learned gentleman could not be himself more anxious for the evacuation of Spain by the French army than the French government themselves were for that event. Individually, he (Mr. Canning) could honestly and conscientiously declare, that he was under no degree of doubt or apprehension about the conclusion of the negotiations relative to the withdrawing of the French troops confirming this statement.

was not more

Lord John Russell was sorry that the right honourable gentleman's statement satisfactory. No less than three different times already had the term for effecting this evacuation been altered and extended.

Sir Robert Wilson was of opinion, that so long as any French troops remained in Spain, the Spanish government would never manifest either good faith or integrity.

Mr. A. Baring rose for the purpose of asking a question relating to a matter which he conceived to be of very considerable importance. A treaty between this country and one of the newly recognized states of South America had been laid on the table, and he had reason to believe, that if the state of the session permitted it, other treaties would have been submitted to their inspection. But it was a remarkable fact, that a most hon. person, an individual of the most deserving description, who had been regularly accredited from one of these states, had not been presented to his Majesty at the

recent

recent levee. It was rumoured that this circumstance arose from the interference of certain foreign powers, who were anxious that the recognition of the SouthAmerican states should be of a mitigated description. Now he wished to know from the right honourable gentleman opposite (Mr. Peel) whether this omission was merely accidental, or whether it was, as rumour had stated, intentional. A treaty had been laid on the table; but it appeared that the minister of the country to which it related had not been received at court. He here begged leave to state, that he made this application without the slightest interference of the person to whom it related. He certainly was acquainted with Mr. Lempriere, but he had not seen him for some months. While he was on his legs, he wished to ask another question, which was of considerable interest as it affected the feelings of a most deserving and meritorious class of people he meant those English officers who had entered into the military service of foreign states. The house must be aware that a regulation, founded on an act of parliament which passed a few years ago, still existed, which placed those individuals in a most extraordinary situation. Many of those officers, at the termination of the war, finding their "occupation gone," and being actuated by a strong love for a military life, as well as by a powerful feeling in favour of those sentiments of liberty which they had imbibed in their native country, had embraced an honourable service amongst the troops of those countries that were strug

gling for freedom, and were in consequence, by the provisions of the bill to which he had alluded,subject to very considerable injury and inconvenience. In making this observation, he did not mean to call in question the policy of the bill to which he had referred, because at the time when it passed, great jealousy existed with respect to the conduct of this country as to the establishment of those new states. Reproaches were cast upon this country by Spain and France in consequence of the part which a liberal policy induced it to pursue. It had been strongly stated, that the battle of independence, which was at that period fighting, and which had ultimately proved successful, had in a great measure been carried on by this country. This certainly was made a great matter of complaint, and though, abstractedly, he did not think that the law then enacted was strictly justifiable, still, looking to all the circumstances, and considering the time, he would not quarrel with the policy in which it originated. The bill, it should be observed, was not to enable the crown to recal officers from foreign service, but it gave to every paltry informer the right to call before a justice of the peace any officer who had taken a commission under a foreign state. If the power existed, as he believed it did, in the crown, to use its discretion in the recal or disqualification of officers, why should this additional power be suffered to exist? The law to which he referred imposed a degradation-imposed a very severe punishment on persons who might contravene its provisions; and yet there was not a gentleman who heard him, who must not view with

the