92] 



ANNUAL REGISTER, 1813. 



Lord CoWi'/fa^'-//, after some com- 

 plaint of the unusual mode in which 

 the right hon. gentleman had 

 brought on the subject, which im- 

 posed on him the task of attempt- 

 ing that explanation of the cir- 

 cumstances connected with the 

 treaty, the detail of which he had 

 expected to be called upon to give 

 only in the committee, proceeded 

 to an elaborate and particular vin- 

 dication of it, chiefly founded on 

 the arguments employed by lord 

 Liverpool in the other House, but 

 more opened and expanded. He 

 said he could not but feel t.liat he 

 owed some explanation to the 

 House on the subject cf a treaty 

 being concluded with any foreign 

 power, and considerable advances 

 made on that treat}', parliament 

 being sitting, without making any 

 communication to them respecting 

 it; but the House would be satis- 

 fied when he should have stated 

 the cause. He then gave some 

 account of the circumstances which 

 had occasioned the delaj' in its ra- 

 tification, and of those which after- 

 wards prevented its being laid be- 

 fore parliament till this was actually 

 done. In speaking of the affair 

 of Norway, he said that modifica- 

 tions had been proposed by the 

 British government to Sweden, 

 which had relaxed so far as to say, 

 " Though 1 feel the whole of Nor- 

 way necessary to my security, yet, 

 if the power of France be dimi- 

 nished, 1 will be content with 

 the bishoprick of Drontheim." 



Mr. Canning censured that part 

 of the treaty which related to the 

 separation of Norway from Den- 

 mark, and thought that although 

 the word guarantee was not ex- 

 pressly mentioned, yet that in fact 

 our obligation amounted to a gua- 



rantee. He also objected to the 

 transfer of Guadaloupe during war, 

 as a circumstance which might 

 throw an obstacle in the way of 

 peace. After a variety of remarks, 

 he concluded with censuring apart 

 of the conduct ofministers,butsaid 

 that he could not think it right to 

 record that portion of the right hon. 

 gentleman's amendment which re- 

 ferred to the conduct of our allies. 



Lord Castlereagh disclaimed any 

 idea of a guarantee as making a 

 part of the engagements of the 

 treaty. 



Mr. Whitbread spoke warmly 

 against the treaty. 



Mr. Canning moved an amend- 

 ment, qualifying the address pro- 

 posed by Mr. Ponsonby. 



A division first took place on Mr. 

 Ponsonby's motion. For it, 115: 

 against it, '22^. Majority for its 

 rejection, 109. 



The House then divided on Mr. 

 Canning's amendment. For it, 121 : 

 against it, 225. Majority, lO-t. The 

 House then went into a committee. 



On bringing up the report of the 

 committee, June 23rd, Mr. Banhes, 

 who had not been present at the 

 former debate, made a number of 

 observations on the treaty, which 

 he thought to be that of all others 

 for which this country was to pay 

 the most, and receive the least. 

 He was replied to by lord Castle- 

 reagh in a repetition of former ar- 

 guments ; and the resolution of the 

 committee was agreed to without 

 a division. 



A debate, or rather conversa- 

 tion, which took place in the 

 House of Commons, respecting 

 Orange Lodg£s,may deserve notice, 

 though followed by no particular, 

 measures, as aftbrding an indica- 



