an expenditure as called on them to break the solemn contract that had been entered into with the Crown. He was sure the hon. member must bring forward a better case than that which he had offered, before he could induce the House to break the faith of parliament with the monarch. He never could consent to lower, in the eyes of the world, the foreign service of the country; nor could he agree with the gentlemen opposite (or rather with some of them, for he believed they did not all approve of the measure), in the propriety of assimilating our practice to that of the United States. He could not approve of a committee which was to investigate all the foreign relations of the country. He could not advise his majesty to send his ministers for examination before such a body. If such a system were ever countenanced, he hoped his majesty would secure a set of ministers ready to act under the control of the gentlemen opposite, or to walk in the leading-strings of a committee above stairs. If such a principle were adopted, it would, he repeated, be high time for his majesty to look out for another set of ministers, [Cheers.] He would as far he was concerned, save the Crown and the House from the distress to which such a system must inevitably give rise; and he would also save the committee from the grave constitutional responsibility which they must necessarily incur. But, though he never would consent to explain any part of this subject to gentlemen above stairs, he felt no unwillingness to give every explanation, consistently with his duty, to gentlemen below stairs.

The hon. member had asked how it happened that there were so many missions, and why their appointments were so expensive? It was rather late in the day for that question. It would have been better had those points been considered when the subject of our foreign alliances was before the House-before this country had entered into bargains which could not now be got rid of. He would, however, contend, that the most economical arrangements had been made, under all the circumstances of the time and of the country. With respect to the number of missions, he denied that there was any thing that entitled the hon. member to question the policy on which the government had acted. Taking that annus mirabilis of comparison, the year 1792, the hon. member proceeded to

argue, that the country at that time was satisfied with diplomatists of lower rank than were now employed, but that, instead of plenipotentiaries, envoys, and charge d'affaires, ambassadors were now sent to different courts. It did so happen, however, that with the single addition of one court, this country had not at the present day a greater number of ministers of high rank abroad than were employed in 1792. Let the House look to the missions that stood on the scale of ambassadorial allow. ances in 1793. These were France, Spain, Holland, and Constantinople, In 1822, there was an ambassador at the court of France, but there was not an ambassador at the court of Spain. This showed that it was not necessary to form a committee for the purpose of inducing the Crown to modify our diplomatic proceedings according to circumstances. Gentlemen opposite might say that this was done because Spain had set us the example. But they must have their committee, they must be acquainted with the facts, they must have all the necessary information before he could allow that their opinion was worth asking or hearing on this point. There were, then, ambassadors to France, Holland, Constantinople, Russia, and Austria. Surely the hon. gentleman must see the necessity of sending ambassadors to those powers who had assisted England in bringing the war to a glorious conclusion, and who with England formed the safeguard of Europe-the quintuple alliance. [Hear, hear! from the Opposition, and a laugh.] Could gentlemen see nothing in the change of circumstances which explained and enforced the necessity of sending an ambassador to Russia and to Austria? should wish to know whether Russia had not taken a very different situation from that which she formerly maintained? [Cheering from the Opposition benches.] He understood the meaning of the gen tlemen opposite, but their opinion on this point must be taken, cum grano salis. It was hardly fair to argue with them on the question of Russia, as their minds were not merely tinctured, but were wholly impressed, with the idea of an anti-holyalliance, under the influence of that power. To return to the immediate point under consideration. There was, at present, it appeared, but one new minister, and that minister was accredited to a royal court, which accounted for it. With respect to ministers plenipotentiary, the

He

number of that class of diplomatists varied very little from the scale of 1792. In the first place, he would mention the plenipotentiary to America; and certainly there was no country in the world with which it was more important for this country to live on terms of amity and mutual good feeling. There were also ministers plenipotentiary to Prussia, the two Sicilies, Sweden, Bavaria (which had grown up to be a power of great import ance to England, and was, in size, fourfold the extent which she formerly was), Wirtemberg, and Sardinia; at all of these courts, with the exception of Wirtemberg, England had ministers plenipotentiary, in 1792, and nearly on the same scale as at the present day. Tuscany, Saxony, and Switzerland, were visited by envoys extraordinary. He had formerly urged the necessity of sending a plenipotentiary to the Hans Towns; but, as the individual, who was then a charge d'affaires, was a clever and respectable man, it was thought better to make an addition to his salary, which was originally 500l. a year, and to engage him to perform the duties which were usually executed by a plenipotentiary. It therefore appeared, that with very little exception, the number of our foreign ministers at present and in 1792 was the same. And here the hon. member had fallen into an error very natural to him upon this subject, not knowing the peculiar circumstances of many of the missions. The hon. member had stated that the expenses had been increased to 60,000l. instead of to 50,000l. A part of the expense of our mission to Constantinople had formerly been paid, not by the Crown, but by the Levant Company, and had been in fact the produce of a sale of protections. This was now paid by the Crown, and amounted to 10,000l. a year, which had formerly been levied by the public. Therefore they must reason upon the sum not as 60,000l., as the hon. member had represented it, but as 50,000l. He would now proceed to examine and explain each class; and the House would judge whether the present establishments were such as this country ought to maintain or not. The six higher missions were in 1793, 50,360. The correspond ing missions in the year 1822 were, in cluding the change of rank, 74,000l., making an increase of 23,6402. This increase gave one-fourth more of salary on an average to the great diplomatic officers, and added about one-sixth to the

whole expense. Nine minor missions, including Wirtemberg, in 1793, were 6,295., and in 1822, 29,000l.; making an increase of 22,705. Now in Italy, on which great expenses were supposed to be thrown away by maintaining a minister at Tuscany, he could inform the House, that in 1793, the salary for that mission had been 3,600., and was now only 3,900l.; so that in fact, after deducting 20 per cent, it was 60. less than in 1792. But why have a minister at Tuscany, it was asked-Why have a minister at Saxony? Why have a minister at Wirtemburg? It was pretty strong proof that it was necessary to have a minister at Tuscany, that we had never been without a minister there. It was not, too, a very mean argument to prove the propriety of having a minister there, though it might not be intelligible to gentlemen on the other side, that every other power had a minister in Tuscany. Spain, Por tugal, and powers who could not be imagined to have any communication with that place, were there represented, as this country had always been. It was a perfectly sufficient proof that our minister was not there merely for idle purposes, that all other powers who wished to know what was doing in the world of which they formed a part were there represented. But it was a fact, that hardly any diplo matic circle was more full than the court of the grand duke of Tuscany. He now came to a mission which the hon. gentleman had dwelt upon with particular pressure, and which was to form the subject of particular discussion. He looked forward to the debate of to-morrow evening without any alarm, and he had no doubt the hope of the hon. member would prove as illusory as many similar hopes entertained on his side; they only required the breath of a little discussion to destroy them. With respect to what the hon. gentleman had said of the unimportance of Switzerland, the whole policy of this government at all times denied his doctrine. We had respected Switzerland from a moral feeling, as well as from a political one; for we had always admired that innocent and brave people for their conduct upon every trying occasion. They had resisted all attacks upon their country, and particularly that of France, with exemplary determination. But, independ ently of this moral obligation, it had always been the policy of this country to send a representative to the Swiss Can

every country to hold that important connexion with Switzerland, and if that feeling should not be supported in this country, our best feelings must be dissolved, and we must be prepared to see it inquired who would go abroad with the least salary. He was astonished at the calumnies, insinuated for party purposes, he must say, and representing that the salary had been augmented for the advantage of a particular individual; or that the office was revived with the view of reconciling political differences. These insinuations were all founded on misapprehension or falsehood. They contained not a particle of truth. Mr. Stratford Canning, when he quitted that mission, had had direction from the king to give assurance, that no time would be lost in sending a person of superior rank to occupy the same place. He dared to say that the hon. gentleman would wish to hear all the anecdotes which would explain the cause of the interval in sending a successor to Mr. Canning. He (lord L.) could indulge the appetite of the hon. gentleman, if he were not afraid that this appetite would grow with indulgence. If the hon. member were to ask him twenty questions, he was prepared to answer them. A gentleman was immediately sent as secretary of legation, and was soon succeeded by Mr. Disbrowe, who repaired at once as chargé d'affaires. Thus he had destroyed the beautiful illusion which had so much pleased the hon. member, and which had persuaded him that the mission had been revived for a politcial purpose. Another insinuation had been, that the salary had been increased for the indulgence of the person who was appointed. Now the salary stood the same as with Mr. Wynn's predecessor, with a difference of 10 per cent less against Mr. Wynn. Mr. Wynn had indeed a pension, but the arrangement could not be more advan tageous for the public, than by selecting one who had a pension. Not that he (lord L.) held himself bound always to select persons having pensions; but how could a selection be more acceptable, than that of a person of family, rank, and consideration? How could the arrangement be more economical, than by selecting such a person, having previously a pension? The salary was 3,900l., from which the pension of 1,500l. as well as the 10 per cent were to be deducted, and it was thus cut down considerably; though cer tainly not so low as the salary of Mr. Braun,

tons. With the exception of two instances, we always had a minister there. One of those instances was very surprising, and he was quite unable to explain it. The other was the period of the last war, when the states of Switzerland were occupied in war, and our missions were itinerant and changed with the circumstances. This, with the other very limited exception, to which he would advert, was the only time when there was not a mission from this country in Switzerland. From 1750 to 1793, there had been four ministers plenipotentiary. There had been a gentleman there what diplomatic crimes he had committed, he was not wise enough to discover-a Mr. Braun who had but 250l.a-year. Unless they were to abandon the whole stream of general policy, they must support this mission so far as our ancestors had done. Switzerland was the great intervening country between Italy, France, and Germany, and was exposed to be disturbed by any disturb. ance in those countries. It was the key stone which held them all together. It had, therefore, been particularly attended to by the congress at Vienna. After the confederacy of Buonaparte had been destroyed, it became a subject of anxious consideration how to estabish the relations which had been involved in it, consistently with the liberty, security, and happiness of Europe. It was agreed that Switzerland should have ministers accredited by all the great powers, and it was a distinct understanding, that they should accredit their ministers to that country, with the express desire of sustaining and completing the arrangement which had occupied so much of their time. It formed no small proof of the importance attached to the preservation of the neutrality of Switzerland, and by that means the tranquillity of Europe, that persons of the highest consideration and importance had been appointed to that mission. The secretary of state of Russia, count Capo D'Istria, was now minister in that country. Though he held the highest station in the government of Russia, yet he was now delivering his credentials for that mission. There, too, the nephew of prince Talleyrand had been minister. These facts he mentioned, because they proved that the great powers of Europe watched anxiously over the policy of the Cantons of Switzerland. Why, Spain, with all her economy, had a minister there, Portugal had a minister there. There was a feeling in

He would now give the fair grounds of the increase of expense for missions. Although the obligation to continue that in⚫crease might be evaded by granting a commission of inquiry, yet he should ill discharge his duty to the king and to the country, if he did not consider the arrangement as a final engagement between parliament and the missions, and that there was great propriety in adhering to it as an economical and just arrangement. It had the recommendation of having entirely removed the chapter of extraordinaries from this department. The increase was about 50 per cent on the scale of the missions. How that was expended he would now state. It had on former occasions been admitted on the other side, that the scale had been infinitely too low for the various demands to which missions were exposed. We were acquainted with the growth of expenses in this country. Since the last two or three years expenses had fallen lower, but had they returned to the level of 1792? or could we have the same articles for double the expense? He put it to gentlemen who had been abroad, whether the growth of expenses on the continent had not increased more largely and more rapidly than in this country. Those expenses had very greatly increased by the increase of our own incomes. We carried with us habits of profusion, which added much to the expense of our missions. The number of our countrymen abroad was so great, that we formed a great part of the population at Brussels and other places. With the true spirit of a modern stoic, the hon. member asked, why should English gentlemen be received by the ambassadors? But he (lord L.) doubted whether the hon. member, if on the continent, would not hold the obligation rather high. But instead of giving a degraded hospitality to the crowds of countrymen who might invade it, it was for the credit of the country that they should exercise their hospitality with a dignity suited to their station. Another cause of increased expense was occasioned by the mode in which business was now conducted. There was a regulation which charged ministers with certain expenses when they were absent for their private convenience. Formerly, they could enjoy all their emoluments when absent, and the officers who supplied their place were paid by the public. Now, it was not so. A secretary of embassy or of legation, according to the degree of the minister, was required to VOL. VII.

conduct the business, and receive 51. aday from his absent principal, if a minister plenipotentiary, and 37. if a secretary of legation. This was found a counteracting motive, and often prevented ministers from desiring leave of absence where there was not a particular reason for it. The hon. member had asked, what had this country to do with the continent, or with the holy alliance? He would answer, that we had more connexion with the existing governments of Europe than at any former period, and particularly with those through whom we looked for the preservation of peace. The scale of business had increased tenfold, too; and this increase was very much growing out of those relations which now connected the several nations. There were arrangements established, by which the views and course of each nation were communicated to others fully and without reserve. It was their pride that no secret or indirect views were cherished and prosecuted by any one power. This state of things created a mass of business which it was quite impossible to conduct in the foreign offices as formerly. Formerly, the minister or his secretary, with his own manual labour, transacted all the business: but at this moment, if he did not employ four or five persons in the office, it was quite impossible to perform the business of the department. This produced a considerable benefit, and it taught a great portion of the diplomatic experience and skill which distinguished the present class of diplomatists. He might be partial to those with whom he was so much connectedhe might feel the influence of gratitude for the services of those who corresponded with him in his official duties-but he did not believe that at any former period so great a mass of talent had been employed in this service. In the offices of the various ambassadors there were, he believed, no less than twenty-one young men of rank, education, and talent, who were serving without fee or reward. They were improving themselves, and qualifying themselves, for the more eminent duties and all that they received in return was, the privilege of living in the ambassador's house. This occasioned a great increased charge to the several ambassadors; but he trusted the House would not think that this was a waste of the public money, especially as it was to be borne in mind that the secrets of the offices were of the most important nature, and could not be

2 S

;