ri IS TORY OF EUROPE. 



6T 



by clearly showing that he had 

 no wish for the concealment of 

 any part of his conduct. The 

 accusers of lord Chathaai turn 

 round on him even when making 

 his defence, and tell him, " We 

 will punish you even for the de- 

 fence you wish to make. It is a 

 libel." In any court to do so 

 would be deemed an act of injus- 

 tice. Mr. Stephen had received 

 no favours from the late Mr. Pitt. 

 He was scarcely known to him. 

 There weie, however, gentlemen 

 in that House who stood in a very 

 different situation. He called on 

 them to assist him — tosee that the 

 son of lord Chatham, and the 

 brother of Mr. Pitt, should at least 

 have justice done him. He was 

 not one of those who thought that 

 the merits of an illustrious father 

 should excuse tiie offences, or even 

 the faults ot" the son. But, at 

 the same time, he would not pluck 

 stones from the monument of the 

 father to bruise the head of the 

 son. The error into which the 

 noble lord had fallen, was, in a 

 great measure, to be pardoned, 

 when he found himself loaded with 

 calumny, though in his anxiety to 

 vindicate himself in the eyes of 

 t his royal master, he had forgot the 

 1 mode and manner. Nor was it to 

 I be forgotten, that lord Chatham 

 was not the first who had thought 

 proper to offer what might be 

 deemed justifications of them- 

 selves. Dispatches from the naval 

 officers had been received which 

 could be construed into nothing 

 else. Mr. Stephen concluded with 

 observing, that the resolutions 

 moved for were such as he could 

 not assent to as an honest man. 

 They would, at least, be prema- 

 ture, if they were themselves just, 

 which he did not admit ; and, 



therefore, he now moved the pre- 

 vious question. 



Mr. Brougham was ready to as- 

 sent to every commendation that 

 had been bestowed on the general 

 character and conduct of lord 

 Chatham. True it was that lord 

 Chatham had been most grossly 

 calumniated, and basely traduced, 

 by the whole of the press under 

 the control of the government. 

 Until the commencement of the 

 present inquiry, the impression on 

 the public mind was, that the la- 

 mentable disappointment of all the 

 sanguine hopes of the country, 

 from the powerful expedition to 

 the Scheldt, was wholly owing to 

 lord Chatham. Such was the ef- 

 fect of the base and unprincipled 

 calumnies against lord Chatiiam, 

 asserted with confidence, and un- 

 contradicted by authority. But 

 it was admitted, by his honourable 

 and learned friend (Mr. Stephen) 

 that the conduct of lord Chatham 

 had been improper and unbecom- 

 ing. There was, then, butatrifling 

 diit'erence between what was thus 

 admitted, and what was contended 

 for by those who supported the 

 resolutions. It was so minute and 

 unpalpable, that he was surprised 

 it should produce any variance of 

 opinion. Mr. Brougham came 

 next to show how the conduct of 

 lord Chatham was a violation of 

 the constitution. There was no- 

 thing stated in the resolutions 

 charging any part of the contents 

 of the narrative as a breach of the 

 constitution. It was the privacy 

 with which the affair was conduct- 

 ed, coupled with the request of 

 secrecy, that constituted the vio- 

 lation of the constitution. It might' 

 be difBoult for him, perhaps, to' 

 point out any particular act o^ 

 parliament making such conduct 



F 2 



