GENERAL HISTORY. 



[117 



by tlie constant usage of Parlia- 

 ment. 



Mr. Tierneif made some severe 

 reflections upon the strain of argu- 

 ment employed by the member 

 who last rose, and supported the 

 censure of the Speaker. After 

 some other members had spoken, 

 and Mr. Whitbread had declined 

 pressing the House to a division 

 upon his amendment. Lord Mor- 

 peth briefly concluded the debate ; 

 and the House dividing on the 

 original motion, there ajjpeared — 

 Ayes 106, Noes 274; Majority 

 against it, 168. Mr. Bankes' re- 

 solution was afterwards carried. 



Such was the termination of a 

 contest the prospect of which had 

 excited considerable interest and 

 expectation in the public. The 

 great majority in favour of the 

 iSpeaker seems to denote either 

 that the House in general regarded 

 him as blameless, or that the weight 

 of his character, and the connection 

 of his honour and reputation with 

 those of the body over which he 

 presided, rendered, in the opinion 

 of the greater number, a public 

 censure inexpedient or indecorous. 

 Yet upon perusing the speeches 

 made on the occasion, few, it is 

 imagined, will be insensible of a 

 great superiority in point of argu- 

 ment, as well as of eloquence, on 

 the side of reproof; and were the 

 question referred to the pub- 

 •lic at large, it can scarcely be 

 doubted that the decision would be, 

 that the Speaker had been betrayed 

 by party zeal (for his honourable 

 character will not admit a more 

 unfavourable interpretation) into a 

 fitep at least improper and of dan- 

 gerous example, if not unconstitu- 

 tional. The discussion of the sub- 



ject will have had a good effect, if 

 it prevents the recurrence of any 

 thing similar. 



It was naturally to be expected 

 that the condition of the Norwe- 

 gians, transferred by a treaty in 

 which they had no participation, to 

 a new Sovereign, and on their un- 

 willingness to consent to this 

 change, threatened with compul- 

 sion, should interest the friends of 

 freedom and independence in the 

 British Parliament ; and as soon as 

 it was understood that the English 

 Government was likely to take 

 a part in the system of force to be 

 adopted against them, tokens ap- 

 j>eared in both houses of an inten- 

 tion to make the subject a matter 

 of discussion. 



On Apiil 29, Lcrd Holland put 

 the question to Lord Liverpool 

 whether, when his Lordship had 

 said that a convention had been 

 signed for a suspension of hostili- 

 ties between France and the Allies, 

 Norway was included among the 

 powers bet»/een whom hostilities 

 had ceased. Lord L. having re- 

 plied in the negative, Lord H. asked 

 whether by that he was to under- 

 stand that we were at war with 

 Norway. Lord Liverpool said he 

 had no objection to state the fact, 

 that measures were taken for the 

 blockade of Norwa}'. 



Earl Grey supposed it was to be 

 understoodfrom this statement, that 

 the ports of that country were to 

 be blockaded, in order to compel it 

 by famine to submit to unite with 

 a foreign power against its inclina- 

 tion. After some more conversa- 

 tion. Lord Grey said, that heshould 

 move on Monday for the production 

 of the paper instructing the Admi- 

 ralty to give orders for the blockaile 



