HISTORY OF EUROPE. 



153 



at the disposal of lord Clancarty a 

 seat in this honourable house. 

 2od. That it was owing to a disa- 

 greement among other and subor- 

 dinate parties to the transaction 

 that it did not take effect. 3rd. That 

 lord viscount Castlereagh has been, 

 by the said conduct, guilty of a 

 violation of his duty, of an abuse 

 of his influence and authority as 

 president of the board of control, 

 and also of an attack upon the pu- 

 rity and constitution of this house." 

 The debate that ensued was 

 long, but not very keen or ani- 

 mated. There was in the long 

 debate of this night a wonderful 

 air of candour and moderation. — 

 Lord Binning said, that though it 

 was impossible to defend lord Cas- 

 tlereagh upon principle, the reso- 

 lution proposed by the noble lord 

 involved a greater punishment than 

 the oftence deserved. There were 

 degrees of offences. A man was 

 not to be punished for a bare in- 

 tention with the same severity as 

 for an actual commission. What 

 was necessary to constitute an of- 

 fence was here wanting. There 

 was no mains animus : no corrupt 

 design appeared in the whole 

 transaction. The noble lord acted 

 not in his official capacity, but as 

 an individual wishing to oblige his 

 friend. Officially he had commit- 

 ted no o&'ence, and the degree of 

 punishment ought to be propor- 

 tioned to the degree of guilt. On 

 these grounds lord Binning moved, 

 that the other orders of the day 

 be now read. — On much the same 

 grounds as those stated by lord 

 Binning, lord Castlereagh was de- 

 fended by the chancellor of the 

 exchequer, Mr. Manners Sutton, 

 and Mr. Canning. Mr. Perceval 

 observed, that lord Castlereagh 



had stipulated that the person to 

 be appointed to the writership 

 must be a proper person ; one 

 who was sufficiently qualified for 

 the situation. The affair could 

 not have been completed without 

 giving his lordship full time to re- 

 view the whole, and to make every 

 proper inquiry. There were 

 shades of offence. Were the re- 

 solutions proposed agreed to, the 

 noble lord must in the end be re- 

 moved from his official situation. 

 Thus the punishment would be 

 made as severe as if the imputed 

 offence had been actually com- 

 mitted.— Mr. C. W. Wynn thought 

 that the intention manifested and 

 acknowledged by lord Castlereagh 

 was sufficient to establish his cri- 

 minality. It had Lieen said, that 

 the patronage in question did not 

 fall to the noble viscount by virtue 

 of his own office, but was attached 

 to some other department distinct 

 from his. This circumstance did 

 not indeed appear to him to be 

 any aggravation of the noble vis- 

 count's fault, but as little was it 

 an extenuation of it. If this were 

 admitted, a door would be opened 

 to numberless other abuses. If a 

 chancellor of the exchequer, for 

 instance, was through corrupt 

 means to procure for any one an 

 appointment in a public depart- 

 ment, he might say, " I have no- 

 thing to do with that. It does 

 not come immediately under my 

 office. It was in the department 

 of my friend, the secretary of 

 state." This exchange, this bor- 

 rowing of patronage for the pur- 

 pose of influencing the return of 

 members to parliament ought to 

 be prevented. If the negotiation 

 failed, it was not from want of in- 

 clination on the part of the noble 



lord. 



