72 ANNUAL REGISTER, 1810. 



and that there was no other word 

 that could precisely express the 

 nature of the offence which he had 

 committed, ai)d which demanded 

 the censure of the House, If there 

 had been any statute against that 

 offence, the proper definition of 

 lord Chatham's conduct would 

 have been, that it was illegal, and 

 that House would then have car- 

 ried the matter to the House of 

 Lords, by impeachment. Mr. 

 Ponsonby, in tiie course of his 

 speech, made some very just, as 

 well as interesting observations, 

 on the connection between na- 

 tional character and government. 

 It was to the constitution, he said, 

 as establi&hed at the revolution, 

 that we owed the character of the 

 people of this country. It was 

 owing to that constitution that 

 there was less caballing than in 

 any other European country ; that 

 even in political hostility there was 

 more openness and candour ; that 

 this character was not confined to 

 ministers and public men, but 

 spread over the whole mass of the 

 population. In the whole of the 

 nation, there was more of pro- 

 bity, and less secret intrigue and 

 duplicity, than in any other Euro- 

 pean nation, and this we owed to 

 the constitution ; of which, as had 

 been observed by his learned and 

 honourable friend, Mr. Adam, in 

 liis able and eloquent speech ; the 

 grand f'oundationwas the complete 

 irresponsibility of the king, and 

 the complete responsibility of the 

 ministers. But if such proceed- 

 ings, as that of lord Chatham, 

 were to be passed over without 

 notice, what would be the conse- 

 quence ? Instead of that candid 

 and open frankness, which distin- 

 guished the higher, as well as the 



lower classes of the community, 

 we should sink to that dejiraded 

 character, which had been the ruin 

 of so many nations of Europe. 



Mr. Canning was not prepared 

 to go the length of the second re- 

 solution. He was not, however, 

 prepared to support the doctrine 

 of Mr. Bar.kes, that the transaction 

 was not unconstitutional. The 

 second resolution, therefore, he 

 would wi-h to see modified. He 

 had drawn up a few lines, not with 

 any intention of moving them him- 

 self, but for the purpose of sub- 

 mitting them to the consideration 

 of the House, for any honourable 

 member to adopt, who might ap- 

 prove of them. The modification 

 heproposedwas, "Thatthe House 

 saw with regret, that any such 

 communication as the narrative of 

 lord Chatham, should have been 

 made to his majesty, without any 

 knowledge of the other ministers ; 

 that such conduct is highly repre- 

 hensible, and deserves the censure 

 of the House." Mr. Bathur.-t was 

 perfectly prepared to vote a cen- 

 sure, though not to institute any 

 farther proceeding. Lord Castle- 

 roagh agreed with Mr. Canning, 

 that the most moderate expression 

 of the sense of the House would be 

 best suited tothe presentoccasion. 

 Yet he could have no hesitation in 

 pronouncing the act in question to 

 be unconstitutional, and .-uch an 

 act, Hs if brought into precedent, 

 might produce much serious mis- 

 chief. 



Mr. Windham thought the con- 

 duct iif lord Chatham wrong to- 

 wards his colleagues in office, and 

 still more towards sir Richard 

 Strachan. But though he allowed 

 it to be highly improper, he could 

 not agree, that it was unconstitu- 



