32] ANNUAL REGISTER, 1815. 



mode of liis detoiitiou. We had 

 been acting in strict conceit with 

 other potentates ; and when Na- 

 poleon was in the power of one, 

 it followed that he must be re- 

 garded as in tlie power of all. As 

 to our undertaking to keep him, 

 it was an advantage to this coun- 

 try to be allowed to <lo it, since 

 we should be better satisfied that 

 it would be properly done, tluin 

 if it had liecn ct)nnniltc'd to ano- 

 ther. As the bill wcmld place 

 liini in (lie character of a prisoner 

 of war, wliieli was well known 

 iji oursladitc Itook, it <hd not ap- 

 pear material to have it ascer- 

 tained how the law stood n( pre- 

 sent in that [)nin(. 



After some fartlicr debate on 

 tlic subject, Lord Holland's mo- 

 tion was negatived, and the bill 

 was read a second time. Mis 

 lordshij) entered a dissentient pro- 

 test on tlie Journals. 



On A\n\l Dtli, the House of 

 Lords being in a connnittee on 

 the i)ill, Lurd UolUnid rose to pro- 

 test against the doctrine main- 

 tained by the noble earl (Bat- 

 hurst) — that when there was an 

 alliance between several powers, 

 if an enemy surreiuk^red himself 

 to one of the powers, he was pri- 

 sonei- of war, not only to that 

 power, init to all the rest, and 

 was to be treated not <mlyaccoi-d- 

 ing to the i)lcasiire of the coimtry 

 to which lie had surrendered, but 

 of the whole allied })owcrs. This, 

 he contended, was subversive of 

 the principles of public hiw, and 

 of the indepenflence of nations. 



Earl Batliurst said, thai he did 

 not mean to hold such a doctrine 

 as that imputed to him, gene- 

 rally ; but to argue, that the alli- 

 ance in ijucbtion being dii-ected 



against Buonaparte personally, 

 not only to dis[)ossess him of his 

 power, but to prevent his return 

 to power, the other potentates 

 had a right to receive some secu- 

 rity, that the object would be car- 

 ried into effect. It was not there- 

 fore a (juestion of general law, 

 but the consequence of this par- 

 ticular treaty. 



'I'he Euvl of Lauderdale niuin- 

 lained, that the doctrine of gene- 

 ral law connected with this sub- 

 ject was of more importance than 

 the bill, or even than the safe 

 custody of liuonapai te ; and dc- 

 lied the noble Earl to point out 

 any passage in a writer on the 

 law of nations to show that, 

 whiilcver were tlic nature of the 

 alliance, a prisoner of war made 

 by one power, was to be consi- 

 dered as much at the disposal of 

 the other })owers as of that to 

 which he had surrendered. 



'Ihe Earl of Harrowby replied, 

 that they were now legislating 

 respecting a transaction of an 

 alliance which had no parallel in 

 the liistory of the world j and 

 therefore there could be no pre- 

 cedent api)licable to the case. 



In the course of the debate, 

 amendments and clauses were 

 proposed by Lords Holland and 

 Lauderdale, which were rejected, 

 exccj)t that an objection made by 

 the latter to the preamble, was 

 admitted. The bill then passed 

 the conimittce. 



On March l-lth,a message was 

 sent from the Prince Regent to 

 each House of Parliament an- 

 nouncing the marriage, with his 

 consent, of his daughter the Prin- 

 cesj Charlotte Augusta, with his 

 Serene Highness Leopold George 

 Frederick, Prince of Cobourg of 



Saalfeld; 



