GENERAL HISTORY. 



[31 



land of St. Helena, during his 

 detention there. His lordship 

 said, that doubts had been en- 

 tertained of the competence of 

 the crown to detain Buonaparte a 

 prisoner after the termination of 

 the war, and the bill proposed 

 was deemed necessary to remove 

 those doubts. With respect to 

 the justice of this detention, it 

 was warranted on two grounds. 

 If he was regarded as a sovereign 

 prince, he might justly be detain- 

 ed in consequence of his breach 

 of treaty, and his incajiacity of 

 affording a guaranty for the ob- 

 sei'vance of any treaty : if as a pri- 

 soner of war, being a native of 

 Corsica, he was a subject of 

 France, which power had declined 

 to claim his restoration. As to 

 the policy of this measure, it was 

 imperiously called for by a due 

 consideration for public safety 

 and general peace. With regard 

 to the treatment of Buonaparte, 

 it was proposed to extend to him 

 evei-y indulgence consistent with 

 his safe custody. 



Leave was given to bring in 

 the two bills ; and it does not ajj- 

 pear that they underwent any op- 

 position in their ptissage through 

 the House of Commons. 



On April Sth, on Earl Bathnrsf s 

 motion for the second reading in 

 the House of Lords of the bill for 

 the more effectual detaining of 

 Buonaparte in custody, Lord Hol- 

 land rose, not, he said, to oppose 

 the bill, as wliatever his own 

 opinion might he, he was aware 

 that a majority fjoth in parliimient 

 and out of doors were of opinion 

 that some such jjrnceeding was 

 necessary; but to call attention 

 to a circumstance connected with 

 the bill. Soon after Buonaparte 



had delivered himself up, a treaty 

 appeared, by which Great Britain 

 had gratuitously offered to guard 

 and keep him. His lordship ask- 

 ed, why the ministers had volun- 

 tarily shackled the councils of 

 this country by such a treaty ? 

 Because, if we were authorized 

 by the law of nations, and the 

 municipal law of the country, to 

 d( tain Napoleon, then we had 

 full power to do so witliout this 

 treaty. If the other powers called 

 upon them for a treaty to effect 

 that object, why did not the mi- 

 nistcrs insist in return upon some 

 benefit for their own country 

 especially when it was so over- 

 burthencd by the immense mi- 

 litary estabUshment, which they 

 had resolved to keep on foot ? His 

 lordship went on to argue, that be- 

 fore passing an act, it was neces- 

 sary to know what we were to le- 

 gislate for was Buonaparte a 



prisoner of war by the law as it 

 now stood, or was he not? And 

 for the decision of this point, it 

 was necessary to desire the at- 

 tendance of the judges. He then 

 mentioned five questions relative 

 to this subject, which he would 

 propose to submit to tl;e judges ; 

 and in conclusion, he moved, 

 that the bill should be read a 

 second time after the recess, and 

 for that pui'pnse tiie word now 

 should be left out of tlie motion 

 for the immediate reading. 



Earl Bathurst said, that Buona- 

 parte's surrender of himself did 

 not make him the less a prisoner 

 of war ; but there luight be some 

 question whether, after a treaty 

 of peace, he could be detained as 

 such ; and this bill had been 

 brought in to clear all doubt on 

 that question, and to regulate the 



mode 



