Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

317

Emigration.

man first, and then trying him. He regretted that he had consented to the proposition for the retirement, for the present, of his hon. friend, from the situation of chairman of the committee of Ways and Means. He thought that neither he himself nor the House had done perfectly right on that occasion. Why had not this objection been made against his hon. friend a year ago? He was as much involved with this Joint-stock company a year ago as he was at present. He had been already tried by the most competent of all tribunals-a tribunal composed of the sufferers; and after a full and minute investigation, had been almost unanimously acquitted. He did not mean to protect his hon. friend against a fair investigation of the charges made against him. If, upon such investigation, his hon. friend could not clear himself, then "let the stricken deer go weep :" he would give him up. But what he complained of was, the prejudice which hung over his hon. friend in the mean time.

The motion was negatived.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, December 8.

EMIGRATION.] The Marquis of Lans-
down said, he had two petitions to submit to
their lordships, which came from a part of
the country with which he was not connect-
ed, but which related to a subject that, from
the unhappy situation of the petitioners,
was calculated to attract the serious atten-
tion of their lordships. It was, however,
his duty to state, that the petitions were
of such a nature that they could not be
laid on the table without approbation
being previously given to them by the
king's government, as the petitioners
prayed for pecuniary assistance to trans-
port themselves to the British colonies in
North America, or to some other part of
the world, in which they might find means
of maintaining themselves by their labour,
instead of remaining in a country in which
they could not obtain subsistence. It was
an affecting circumstance, and one which
could not fail to recommend the petition
to the consideration of their lordships,
that they came from persons who were
not desirous of leaving their native land
from any love of change, or any spirit of
discontent, but solely from the unhappy
circumstances into which the manufac-
turing districts had recently fallen, and

which, however contrary to the habits to
which they had been accustomed, induced
the petitioners to seek in foreign climes
the means of maintaining their families in
some degree of comfort. It was not his
intention to offer any decided opinion as
to how far it would be proper for the go-
vernment to promote emigration. At the
cir-
same time, he must say, that there was
no period in any country, under any
cumstances, and more especially in this
But it was for the
country, which appeared fitter for inquiry
than the present.
king's government to consider well how
measure ought to be carried
such a
into effect; on how great a scale, and
under what regulations it would be right
to proceed.

Here, two considerations
would present themselves; first, as to
what extent emigration could be carried,
consistently with the degree of expense
which might be borne by this country in
transporting a multitude of people to
colonies, and with regard to the safety of
the colonies themselves; secondly, to
what extent any plan could be carried, so
as to afford relief to the starving part of
the population. In thus stating the ques-
tion, he must add, that he had not been
able to satisfy himself that it would be
possible to administer relief by emigration,
to that extent which some persons seemed
to suppose could be accomplished-that
was, to the extent of providing subsistence
for the large body of manufacturers now
suffering under great distress. Now as to
the means, the question for the consider-
ation of the government and the House
would divide itself into two parts; first,
what would be the expense attending such
an operation on a large scale; and next,
whether that expense was one which could
be recommended. If it should be found
that the expense was one which could
not be recommended, it would then fall
to be considered, whether an emigration
of a more limited nature, which would
take out of the country that description
of persons who, having some small capital,
were capable of contributing to the ex-
pense of their removal, should be encou-
raged. He was not prepared to say, that
some plan of emigration might not be
safely carried on, under the direction of
the government. He was afraid, however,
that if any plan were adopted for relief in
this instance, it would be impossible to
tell how far the House might afterwards
be called upon to go. However deep the

distress of the petitioners, he could not immense tracks of lands, on which no but feel that there were other parts of the house was erected, and which were covered empire in an equally unfortunate situa- with immense forests. It would, there tion; from which, therefore, similar ap- fore, be very hazardous to place large plications might be expected to come. It numbers of any description of people in was extremely difficult to see to what con- those trackless lands, in the hope that sequences such an opening might lead. they might be able to support themselves; All, then, that remained for him to do, and it would be much more so to send was to express his satisfaction, in know- there persons born and brought up in ing, that this important subject had cities. He did not wish the observations engaged the attention of his majesty's he had just made to be understood as imministers. He trusted that means would plying, that the relief which the petitioners be found of doing something at once prac- prayed for ought not to be given. It was ticable and consistent with sound princi- not his intention that they should be so ples of policy. understood. He had made them for the purpose of showing to their lordships, the necessity of great consideration, before that species of relief which was prayed for should be granted. With that object, in the course of last session, a committee had been appointed by the other House of Parliament. That committee had made a report on the subject, and it was his intention to move, that a message be sent to the Commons for a copy thereof. Should any measure for encouraging emigration be adopted, great discrimination must be employed in the choice of persons to be sent abroad. The aged, the sick, and the infirm must be excluded; not because they were unworthy of relief, but because the particular species of relief called for was not applicable to them; for to send out to a foreign country those who were rendered helpless from infirmity, would be only to expose them to unspeakable calamities.

Earl Bathurst said, that as the consent of the Crown was necessary, before the petition could be laid on the table, he rose for the purpose of giving that consent; but in doing so, he wished to be understood, that the government pledged itself to nothing on the subject. That consent was given purely for the purpose of enabling the petitioners to express their sentiments to their lordships. Those petitioners were labouring under a degree of distress which it was impossible to think of without sympathy; and they had borne their sufferings with patience. He wished he could add that the distress was confined to the district whence the petitions came. Unhappily, it was very general. He believed, however, that there was scarcely ever a period, in which sufferings had been endured with such forbearance and obedience to the laws. At the same time he must observe, that he believed there never was a time when the public had stept forward so readily to relieve those sufferings by liberal pecuniary assistance, and in forming committees to manage and distribute the aid raised by subscription. It must also be added, that there never was a time in which so few instances were known, of persons ready to aggravate the distress, by using inflammatory language, and exciting the suffering multitude to acts of violence. All this was not only very creditable to the country, but also to the sufferers, who were entitled to every regard, for their unshaken loyalty and obedience to the laws of their country. With respect to the particular case of the petitioners, they prayed for pecuniary assistance to forward themselves to a settlement in those possessions which belonged to the Crown in North America. Their lordships were aware that these possessions consisted of

Ordered to lie on the table.

HOUSE OF COMMONS,

Friday, December 8.

CAPE OF GOOD HOPE-CONDUCT OF LORD C. SOMERSET.] Mr. Brougham said, he had been informed, that in the discussion which had taken place last night respecting the Cape of Good Hope, a question had arisen as to the course which he intended to pursue with regard to a petition which he had formerly presented, complaining of the misconduct of the governor of that colony. That petition he had presented two sessions ago, on behalf of Mr. Bishop Burnett; and he understood it was now said, that the report of the commissioners had dealt with the subject matter of that petition, and He had not completely exhausted it. read that report with any great attention

i

321

Case of Colonel Bradley.

|

ever, briefly recapitulate them, in order that
those members who had not seats in the
last parliament might understand its object.
In the course of the year 1814, while
lieut.-colonel Arthur was acting as mili-
tary governor of Honduras, the regiment
in which he held the rank of lieut.-colonel
was disbanded, and he himself reduced to
Lieut-colonel Bradley, who
half-pay.

he

but in the cursory perusal he had given it, he did not find that it referred at all to those parts of the petition to which his notice had been more particularly called. In presenting that petition, he had said, that there were some matters stated in it of so extraordinary a nature, that he could not believe them to be facts; but that if they were facts, it was impossible for the House not to take the earliest opportunity was then stationed with his regiment at pay, of investigating them most rigorously. Honduras, conceived that, as he was the The matters to which he referred did not older officer, and was also on full form what was more particularly called was entitled, by the laws of the service, the case of Mr. Bishop Burnett. That to take the command of the military individual had brought forward, in his forces at Honduras from lieut-colonel petition, collateral charges against lord Arthur, as that officer had been reduced Charles Somerset, of far greater import- from full to half-pay. Lieut.-colonel and ance than those which formed the sub- Arthur refused, however, to resign his stance of his own case, and to those command to lieut.-colonel Bradley, charges his own attention had been forci- claimed to act as military governor, on a As lieut.bly attracted. The report of the commis- commission from general Fuller, the comsioners might have thrown light on those mander-in-chief at Jamaica. accusations; but if it had not, there was colonel Bradley would not admit the a strong necessity that an ample investiga- authority of lieut.-colonel Arthur, that tion of them should be instituted. He officer placed him under arrest, kept him had understood that lord Charles was in close confinement for 312 days, and coming home, and indeed had arrived, to then sent him to England. On his arrimeet the charges preferred against him. val in England lieut.-colonel Bradley He was glad to hear that fact, because the found that he had been dismissed the sercase of Bishop Burnett was much sub- vice, and was only permitted, as a reward ordinate to the charges which his petition for twenty-one years' service, to dispose, opened against the noble lord. He would at the regulated price, of his commission. take the earliest opportunity of examining Being convinced of the illegality of lieut.the report more accurately than his avoca- colonel Arthur's conduct towards him, he tions had hitherto enabled him to do. brought an action against that officer, and The charges to which he alluded, might the damages which he would otherwise not be noticed in the first report of the have recovered were greatly diminished, in commissioners, which was already on the consequence of two officers from the table of the House; and yet might be Horse-Guards producing on the trial a made subject of inquiry in their second document, purporting to be a commission Since report, which would be forthcoming imme- authorizing lieut.-col. Arthur to take the diately. If they were not noticed in military command at Honduras. either one or the other-if they did not that time the noble Secretary at War had meet with a satisfactory refutation from said, that the document then produced in so court, and sworn to be a commission, was the noble lord whose conduct was strongly implicated by them-he should not a commission, but a letter of service. think it still necessary for the House to If it were so, he was instructed to say, institute a rigorous inquiry into their truth that by the laws of the army no officer was bound to obey another, unless he or falsehood. could produce a regular commission, giving him superior authority. As lieut.colonel Bradley had been reduced to ruin by his dismissal from the army, after twenty-one years' service in it in foreign climates, and as it was said that the commission on which lieut.-colonel Arthur claimed the command at Honduras was still in existence, he did not see what rational objection could be made to its pro

CASE OF COLONEL BRADLEY.] Mr. Hume said, that in making his present motion he must necessarily bring under the consideration of the House a case of gross and flagrant military oppression. The facts on which his motion rested were well known to the House, as he had on more than one occasion presented them distinctly to its notice. He would, howVOL. XVI.

M

parliament, that he owed the House an apology for pressing upon its attention so hacknied a subject; but, as there might be some members who were unacquainted with them, he felt it necessary to mention them as briefly as possible. The state of the case was simply this: Lieut.colonel Arthur was appointed by the duke of Manchester, governor of Honduras, and received from general Fuller a commission, or letter of service, authorizing him to take the command of the troops stationed there. Lieut.-colonel Bradley was, therefore, placed as an officer under the command of lieut.-colonel Arthur. The regiment to which lieut.-colonel Arthur belonged was disbanded, and he himself was put on half-pay. Lieut.colonel Bradley then chose to suppose, that as lieut.-colonel Arthur's regiment was disbanded, and lieut.-colonel Arthur was placed on half-pay, that officer ceased to retain any military authority at Honduras-an authority which, it ought to be recollected, he derived, not from his regimental commission, but from the commission he received from general Fuller. Lieut.-colonel Bradley made himself the interpreter of the law on the point, and not only made himself the interpreter of the law, but also determined to act upon his own interpretation. He not only said, that lieut.-colonel Arthur had ceased to command, but also attempted to supersede his own commanding officer. He took upon himself great responsibility in so doing, and he ought not now to complain that he was compelled to stand by the consequences of it. Under such circumstances, lieut.-colonel Arthur did that which any officer similarly situated would have done, and if he had not done so, he would have deserved dismissal from the

duction. The object of his motion was two-fold first of all, he wished to obtain copies of the commission said to be granted in 1814, under the authority of the duke of Manchester, by general Fuller, to take the command of the military forces stationed at Honduras, whilst he was only on half-pay; and, secondly, he wished to have a copy of lieut.-colonel Arthur's report to the commander-in-chief in 1820, after he had placed lieut.-colonel Bradley under arrest, and also his correspondence with earl Bathurst, who was then at the head of the colonial depart ment, on the same subject. He did not wish to have those letters produced for his own private information, for he had already seen copies of them, but for the information of the House. From those letters it was evident, that at the time he wrote them, lieut.-colonel Arthur had no such commission as it was now pretended that he held; for, in one of them, he wished to be informed in what situation he, who was only an officer on half-pay, was to be considered with regard to lieut.-colonel Bradley, who was an officer on full pay, and at the station, in command of his regiment. When those papers should be placed upon the table, he was sure it would appear to the House, that gross injustice had been done to lieut.-colonel Bradley, and that he was entitled to receive from the House some remuneration for the losses he had sustained after twenty years of service. He called the particular attention of those members who were officers in the army, to the harsh mauner in which lieut.-colonel Bradley had been treated, and reminded them, that if any officer could be so treated without obtaining redress, the condition of gentlemen in the army would soon be little better than that of so many slaves. The hon. mem-service he placed lieut.-colonel Bradley ber then concluded by moving for a series of papers embracing the objects mentioned in his speech.

Lord Palmerston said, he should feel it to be his duty to object to the production of the documents, not because the despatches which were called for did not exist for he had seen them himself-not because he had any doubt as to the genuineness of the commission or letter of service, for it had been admitted as evidence in a court of justice, but because no parliamentary grounds had been laid for their production. The merits of the case had been so often discussed in the last

under arrest for an act of mutiny. The question between the two officers was then referred to the commander-in-chief, who, after hearing them both, decided that lieut.-colonel Arthur was in the right, and that lieut.-colonel Bradley was in the wrong. As it was impossible to pass over such a breach of military law, the commander-in-chief felt it to be his duty to remove lieut.-colonel Bradley from the service. The whole affair was submitted to the king, and his majesty was pleased to confirm the determination to which the commander-in-chief had come. Lieut.colonel Bradley was not cashiered, as he

perhaps deserved to be: he was allowed to retire, receiving the value of his commissions, which by the bye he had not purchased. He would now inform the House, that, although in the main points lieut.-colonel Arthur was right, there was still one in which he had been guilty of erroneous judgment. He had done right in placing lieut.-colonel Bradley under arrest, but wrong in retaining him under arrest-not, however, in close confinement, as the hon. member had stated-until he was dismissed from the service. After lieut.-colonel Bradley was dismissed from the army, he brought his case under the consideration of the legal tribunals of the country. He was not satisfied with the decision of the duke of York; he was not satisfied with the decision of his majesty, and he therefore applied for redress to the laws of his country. He contended, that he had suffered great injury, and took the best means in his power to obtain redress. The result of the trial was, that the court affirmed, that lieut.-colonel Arthur had authority to confine lieut.colonel Bradley: it negatived the assertion, that lieut.-colonel Bradley had been illegally detained in the first instance; but it said, that though lieut.-colonel Arthur was justified in the original arrest, he had continued it beyond the necessity of the case, and it therefore gave him a verdict of 2001. Lieut.-colonel Bradley was not satisfied with this result. He moved for a new trial, on the ground of a misdirection on the part of the learned judge, and had it refused him. His assertion of injury was negatived by the commander-in-chief; then by his majesty; then by a court of law on the trial; and last of all, by a court of law on application for a new trial. Such being the case, on what ground could the House now interfere in this transaction? He thought that these documents were only wanted to enable lieut.-colonel Bradley to swell his next petition with their statements; and that being his opinion, he felt it to be his duty to negative the motion.

Mr. Hume said, that he very much doubted the existence of the letter of service. It was first brought to light in 1819, and he could produce a letter from lieut.-colonel Arthur, proving that he had no such commission at that time. If he had had such a commission, why did he not produce it when he was three times specifically asked to do so? The reason

was plain. He had no such commission, and therefore could not produce it. He would ask any officer who heard him, whether lieut.-colonel Bradley, being an officer on full pay, would have done his duty, if he had yielded up the command of his regiment to an officer on half-pay? To what tribunal could lieut.-colonel Bradley appeal for redress, if the House should refuse to interfere on his behalf? Surely the justice of the House would prevent an officer, who had served twentyone years, from being overwhelmed by ruin, because he had unfortunately differed with a brother officer on a matter of military discipline, which appeared to be involved in doubt and obscurity.

Lord Palmerston begged to remind the House, that the hon. member and himself were at issue as to a fact. The hon. member had said, that the commission had no existence in 1814. He replied that it had. It was matter of proof, and had been placed on record; and when the hon. member said that the commission did not exist, he denied a fact which had been proved by the oaths of most honourable and virtuous witnesses. If that were proved in a court of justice, it became a matter of fact. The hon, member could not, by any ingenuity, "rail the seal from off the bond." That commission had been produced; and if it was asserted, no matter by whom, that it was a fabricated document, then he must say, that such an assertion was a base, scandalous, infamous calumny, which he felt himself bound to repel, on the part of those affected by it, with all that contempt and disdain that it merited. Not a greater falsehood could be conceived. The commission was granted by general Fuller in 1814; and it was not true, that, in colonel Arthur's letter of 1818, no mention was made of it. He read, last year, a letter from colonel Arthur, in which he alluded to that commission; and he there adduced his holding such commission, as a reason for his exercising the authority he had previously possessed. He, therefore, would repeat, that there could not be a greater falsehood, let it come from whom it might, than to assert, either that no such commission was in existence, or that, if it were in existence, it was fabricated for some base, sinister, and miserable, purpose.

Colonel Torrens vindicated the officers of the army from the aspersion which had been cast upon them.

« ForrigeFortsæt »