for the erection of churches in Scotland, in such districts as either by their great extent, от increased population, were, at present, unprovided with places of public worship, and also for endowing ministers to officiate in them when built. Now, the taking 10,000l. from a fund voted for these purposes, for the sake of applying it towards the building of a church of mere ornament in Edinburgh, did appear to him a misapplica tion of the money totally unjustifiable [Hear, hear!]. Mr. Monck said, that this magnificent, temple placed as it was on the top of a hill, might be good as an object to the inhabitants of Edinburgh, but was by no means so as a place of worship. He did not dispute the propriety of gentlemen erecting such a monument of their gratitude out of their own pockets; but he must object to wringing the money out of the purses of a people already overburthened by taxation. Mr. Bennet said, that when he gave his consent to the grant of 100,000l. for building churches in Scotland, it was not for the purpose of gratifying the taste of the people of Edinburgh in splendid buildings. If they had a fancy to exhibit their taste to the world, he thought it but fair that they should indulge it at their own expense, and not out of the pockets of the people of England. Mr. C. Grant was of opinion, that to grant 10,000/. for the erection of a splendid object in the town of Edinburgh, would be a gross misapplication of the public money. He could not help recollecting that there were several parishes in the highlands, full forty miles in extent, without a single church in them. The propriety of this grant ought to be submitted to the general assembly of the church of Scotland. Lord Binning said, he should be the last man in the world to make the motion, if it would have the effect of depriving Ireland of any part of the assistance to which she had so strong a claim. But it was only intended to give a particular direction to money already voted by the House. The population of Edinburgh had considerably increased of late, and the increase of churches had not been in proportion. He would, however, withdraw his motion. HOUSE OF LORDS. Carnarvon, on the order of the day for the third reading of this bill, rose to give the measure his support. If the passing of this act tended to throw an increased quantity of money into circulation, in so far its effects would be beneficial. As, however, the notes of the country bankers were to be payable in gold, the bill could have this effect only in a slight degree. He did not think, therefore, that it would have any material effect in counteracting Mr. Peel's bill. It was the only measure which had been brought forward for the relief of agriculture. He should be told that that distress was caused by superabundance of produce but he could prove that there was no superabundance. The noble lord then proceeded to quote from tables of prices current, the returns of cattle sold in Smithfield, the wheat in Mark-lane, and other documents, to show, that the state of the currency had alone influenced the rise and fall of produce. When the circulation diminished, the prices were low; when it increased, they were high; and agricultural prosperity had fluctuated with the currency. The noble lord next quoted the prices of the contracts of provisions for the supply of Greenwich hospital, from 1744 to the present time, to show that transitions from war to peace had never before had any extraordinary effect, and that there was no such thing as high war prices and low peace prices. He then adverted to the increase in the price of wheat, which was principally governed by the quantity of circulating medium in the country. This was clear from a reference to the prices of 1814, and down to 1819, since which they had been declining, owing entirely, as he contended, to the financial operations of the country, particularly to those of the Bank during that period. Early in 1816, the government, owing to the then alarming depression of agriculture, and the failure of several of the country banks, increased the circulating medium by a large issue of Exchequer-bills, which at once relieved agriculture. Unfortunately, however, in 1819, came Mr. Peel's bill, which, by the immediate contraction of the circulating medium, affected and depressed the agricultural interests. If, by returning to the old standard, they had produced the evil, why not retrace their steps? Let them make one more change -let them divide the loss and the gain, and substitute a standard better suited to SMALL NOTES BILL.] The Earl of the capacity of the country as it now ex isted. The committee of 1815 ought to have ascertained that the people could bear the weight of taxation under the pressure of the projected change in the currency. This measure if carried to its full length, would go to the confiscation of the whole landed interest. As to the supposed injustice of a revision of the standard to the public creditors, he denied that any such result could follow. With what grace could ministers talk of the inviolability of faith which they were ready to maintain with the public creditor, when they had already, by their arrangements respecting the sinking fund, taken from him the redeeming security which they had pledged themselves to uphold? If parliament separated without devising some measure of relief, the people would be left almost in a situation of despair. It needed but one or two seasons more under the present system, and every thing valuable possessed by the landowners and by the agriculturists would pass into the hands of other persons. He saw no remedy for the existing grievance short of parliament retracing its steps, and giving an increased measure of currency to the country. The Earl of Liverpool observed, that the present bill was not at all contemplated in the view of a particular remedy for agricultural distress. With respect to those distresses, he never did consider that they were to be attributed to the change in our currency, effected by the return to cash payments. It was not one cause that was at work, but a variety of causes combined, all growing out of the greatest change that had ever occurred in the history of nations, within the memory of man. Who that contemplated the character of the late war could for a moment think of comparing the events of that war, and the state of things growing out of it, with the events and effects of any former war? He had never complained of over-production, nor did he undervalue the blessings of an abundant harvest. His argument was, that the artificial causes arising out of the state of Europe, had forced a great portion of the poor lands in this country into cultivation, the high demand at that period having insured to the cultivator a remunerating price. It was impossible that the profits of those who had so extensively cultivated the poorer soils, should not have experienced a great depression with the cessation of the war de mand. The expenditure of the Victualling office alone was two millions, in the purchase of corn and cattle. Take such a customer out of the market, and a considerable over-production would remain on hand? When it was recollected, that from 1819 to the time he was speaking, there had been no foreign corn imported, and when to this was added the great increase of importation from Ireland, was it not evi. dent that there must be a vast over-production? The noble earl had recommended a change in the standard of the currency, as a remedy for the agricultural distress. Let not the House conceal from itself the true character of such a remedy. Let it not disguise from itself that, whether by changing the standard, or at once diminishing the interest of the public creditor, they were in fact committing a partial act of bankruptcy. He agreed with Adam Smith, that states, if unhappily incapacitated from fulfilling their engagements, should act as honest individuals acted, who, when they were unable to pay 20s. in the pound, exposed their affairs to their creditors, and gave up all they possessed in liquidation of their debts. Better at once adopt such a course, than resort to a depreciation of the standard of our currency. When these loans were contracted there was a positive stipulation, that after the termination, of the war, the country should revert to its ancient standard. But, though the agricultural interest sustained a great pressure, it was to be borne in mind, that the other great classes of the community had endured all the pressure of the war. True, there was a great change in the disposition of property; but he denied there was any diminution of the national wealth. One very important class might and did suffer; but, while the other great interests improved, that improvement made it certain that the suffering class would speedily right itself. There was no diminution of the capital, the skill, the industry, and talent of the country; and, seeing all these in full operation, he objected to any change which would put to hazard those great springs of national prosperity. Lord Calthorpe contended, that there was in the machinery of the act of 1819, some unexplained obstacle, that counteracted that self-restoring energy which was the characteristic of this country under all its vicissitudes. The bill was read a third time and passed. HOUSE OF LORDS. Wednesday, July 17. munition, or had connived at the employment of a single Englishman on board, let them recollect that they were amenable GREEK HOSTAGES AT CONSTANTI- to their own Enlistment act, and might NOPLE.] Earl Grosvenor said, that the fall into the snare which they had spread House had been occupied during the pre- for others. He should be told that whatsent session in inquiring into the distresses ever cruelties the Turks had committed, of agriculture in this country, into those the Greeks had also been guilty of some. of nearly the whole population of Ireland, Tripolitza, however, was the only place and into the state of that most disgrace- where that charge could be maintained ful traffic, the Slave-trade, which, to its against the Greeks: and even there the immortal honour,parliament had abolished, most horrible atrocities had been comand which England was endeavouring to mitted by the Turks upon numerous prevail upon other nations to abolish also. Greek hostages, before the capture of He trusted, therefore, that their lordships that city. So that cruelty had provoked would not think it unworthy of their dig. cruelty. There was no part of England nity to consider the state of unfortunate where the people did not feel anxious for Christian slaves, on whom cruelties had the success of the Greek cause. He atbeen committed, which had excited the tributed the extraordinary conduct of his greatest horror throughout the country. majesty's ministers to their apprehensions He should not enter into the causes of of the increasing strength of Russia. No the war between Turkey and Greece, and doubt she might be endeavouring to exshould not examine whether it had arisen tend her dominions towards the West, and from the voluntary impulse of the latter, to assume a power on the sea, to which it or from the intrigues and treachery of would be lowering the dignity of England Russia. All that it was necessary to to submit. But, whatever fear of her know was, that such an horrible warfare might be entertained with respect to existed; and all that it was important to Poland and other parts, none could be ascertain was, whether by adopting a excited by Greece. On the contrary, if different system his majesty's ministers all nations united in making Greece an might not put an end to it. However independent state, it would become a this might be, no sooner did it appear barrier against which the gigantic power that Russia was not going to war, than of Russia would be broken. But even if that moment had been chosen by the this were not the case, he would rather Turks to massacre or lead into captivity risk any thing than allow the Turks to the whole population of Scio, and to accomplish the subjugation of the Greeks. murder the hostages from that island at The noble earl concluded by moving, for Constantinople. It was said that a pledge" copies or extracts of all dispatches rehad been obtained from the Divan by the British ambassador, that these anticipated cruelties should not be committed, and this assertion had not been contradicted. That pledge, however, if it had really been given, had been set at nought, and all the apprehended atrocities had taken place. He did not mean to say, that that should be a cause of war; but it would justify this country and all others in withdrawing from any connexion with such detestable barbarians, and drawing a cordon sanitaire round Turkey. But, if ministers would not break off all communication with Turkey, they ought at least not to show it any favour. They professed that they had not done so; but strong suspicions to the contrary prevailed. Let their lordships look at the Turkish frigate which was now arming in the Thames. If it were true that ministers had furnished it with arms and amVOL. VII. ceived from his majesty's ambassador at Constantinople, relative to the execution of the hostages there and at Scio." The Earl of Liverpool could scarcely believe that there was a precedent for such a motion. The question was, an act of cruelty committed by the government of Turkey-on whom?-on its own subjects. What right had this country to interfere with the conduct of another government towards its own subjects? How far might not such a principle be carried? Let it be supposed that an insurrection in this country had rendered the employment of a military force necessary to put it down, and that it had been done under circumstances which appeared highly cruel to foreign nations. What would their lordships say, if the ministers of France or of Spain interfered in a case between the government of England and its own subjects? There were cases in 50 which a nation might interfere with the internal concerns of another; but that was only when her own safety was at stake. But did he mean to say, that if a great act of cruelty were on the eve of being committed, and that it was in the power of a British ambassador, through the personal influence with which circumstances might have invested him to prevent it, he should not use that influence for such a purpose? Far from it. And there was no one who knew lord Strangford, who would not believe that he would exert all his personal influence to prevent enormities of that kind; but not on the ground of right. Indeed, he was persuaded, that by adopting the motion of the noble earl, instead of facilitating such interference in future cases, the House would prevent it from having any effect; as it was not on public right that it ought to be founded. He should not enter into the nature of the contest between the Turks and the Greeks. It was true that most horrible scenes had taken place; but the noble earl was mistaken if he believed they were all on one side, and that with respect to the transactions at Scio, the first horrors had been committed by the Turks. This, he would admit, was no palliation of the conduct of the latter, and still less of the flagitious act perpetrated at Constantinople. With respect to the charge of partiality on the part of his majesty's government, it was unfounded. They had observed the strictest neutrality. There was undoubtedly a vessel here, but it was a Turkish frigate sent by the Pacha of Egypt antecedent to the insurrection of the Morea, partly laden with merchandize, and partly with curiosities for the British Museum. She had come in the character of a merchant vessel, and having brought those articles to this country, had undergone the necessary repairs. She had afterwards applied to be armed, but arms, stores, and all kinds of ammunition had been positively refused. Such was the real state of the case on which a charge of partiality had been grounded. Lord Holland conceived that the noble earl must have misunderstood the words of the motion, when he had taken it for one of interference in the concerns of other nations, and had said that it had no precedent. It was nothing more than what the noble earl had done himself last year previous to discussing the affairs of Naples, when he had moved for the cor respondence of sir W. A'Court, giving an account of the events in that country. His noble friend had asked whether it was true that the government of this country had guaranteed the safety of the hostages massacred by Turkey; and to this the noble earl had made no answer. There was no man of common feeling who was not interested in the success of the Greeks. He did not wish to interfere with the policy and conduct of this country, which must be regulated by circumstances; but if such an aspersion had been thrown on the character of Great Britain as that she assisted the horrible tyranny of the Turks, it became parliament to vindicate her and ministers themselves from a species of calumny most disgraceful to any country. He did not charge the noble earl with such a partiality; but if such a suspicion existed in Europe, it was his duty to justify the country by producing the correspondence of the British minister at Constantinople. If he could give as satisfactory an explanation on that point as he had done with respect to the Turkish frigate, why should the noble earl withhold it? The Earl of Liverpool had not understood that any question had been put to him, whether the British ambassador at Constantinople had guaranteed the safety of the hostages from Scio. Now that he understood such a question to have been put, he had no difficulty in saying, that no such guarantee ever could be, or was given. The motion was then negatived. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Wednesday, July 17. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE-COMPLAINT AGAINST MR. HOPE and Mr. Menzies.] On the motion of Mr. Courtenay, the order of the day for the attendance of John Hope, esq. was read. Whereupon he was called in; and the Speaker communicated to him the proceedings of the House of the 9th instant, in the matter of the complaint of a printed letter, signed John Hope, and addressed to Mr. Abercromby. The said printed letter being shown to Mr. Hope, he confessed himself to be the author thereof. Upon being informed by the Speaker, that if he had any explanation to offer to the House this was the time for doing so, Mr. Hope said:-Sir, I beg to return my grateful acknowledgments to this honourable House for the opportunity which has been afforded me, and of which I gladly avail myself, of offering some explanations for the publication of that letter which has been voted by this House to be in breach of their privileges.-Sir, it is not my intention, or my purpose, to state any thing which can be at variance with the resolution of the House communicated by you, declaring that letter to be in breach of their privileges. I am fully sensible that the letter may be construed as a breach of their privileges; though I hope there are many reasons which will induce the House to consider it rather as a technical and venial than as any serious breach of their privileges. And, Sir, with the feelings, and with the principles upon which all my opinions are formed-entertaining the most profound respect for this House-regarding its privileges as not less valuable to the people than to the representatives of the people regarding the representative branch of the constitution with the feelings of one who values, dearer than life, the liberty which it has secured and maintained with these feelings and with these principles, I own, Sir, that in the cruel situation, in which recent occurrences placed me, there was nothing which gave me more pain or more regret, than that the only effectual and direct course which I thought I could take to vindicate my own character and honour, led to that which may be considered an apparent act of contempt against this House. I am induced, however, to believe, that, in disposing of this case, you will have regard to the circumstances in which that breach of privilege was committed, and to the situation and feelings of the party who is to answer for it. Sir, the House, I believe, is aware generally of the circumstances in which this breach of privilege was committed; and I hope they will give me credit when I state, that that letter was not published with any view of contemning the authority, or of invading or decrying the privileges, of this House. My object was, the vindication of my private and professional character and of my public conduct, and the correction of the mis-statement- as they appeared to me, the unaccountable and unjust mis-statements, upon which grave and serious imputations had been founded.-Sir, in that publication which went forth into the world as the report of a recent discussion in this House, there were accusations against me, founded on alleged delinquency in the discharge of public duties, of a very serious and grave description. Had these accusations related merely to alleged illegality or irregularity in any part of my official conduct, I should have waited with perfect composure and with perfect confidence, until a regular inquiry might be made respecting my conduct. But the charges contained in the report of that debate were of a different, of a more serious, and, permit me to say, somewhat of an intolerable character. The charges were those of malicious prosecution and of wanton oppression-of having instituted a prosecution, in which it was said I never intended seriously to insist-for the inhuman, the horrible, the revolting purpose of preju dicing the cause of another person who was about to stand his trial in a case of life or death. And, Sir, the ground upon which that motive was imputed to methe way in which colour and plausibility seemed to be given to the charge-was by adducing in evidence of the alleged per sonal hostility and malignity against the individual who was so to be put upon his trial, certain proceedings which had taken place in one of the Scotch courts antecedent to the duel which gave occasion to that trial, and for which proceedings it was asserted that I was responsible. Sir, these accusations imputed to me, that I had engaged in a private cause with a degree of furious zeal and malignity and personal hatred, which had actuated me afterwards in my official conduct-These accusations imputed to me, that I had sacrificed the interest of my supposed clients, and aggravated the of fence for which they were prosecuted in order to gratify and to indulge those feelings-imputed to me, that, to indulge those feelings, I had advocated a plea which it was said was calculated to lead to crime, to bloodshed, and to murderimputed to me, the employment and the abuse of professional exertions and opportunities, in order to gratify personal hostility-imputed to me, in short, the absence of all those qualities, without which, of course, no counsel can ever hope to obtain public confidence-without which no gentleman is worthy of acting in any court of law. These accusations were accompanied also with imputations of a more serious description, to which I do not wish to trust myself even to allude. Need I say, that these were imputations |