worship. Sir, I contend that these points are much too unimportant to induce us to go into a committee upon a petition which embraces the whole of this important subject, and which excites the hopes and fears of all the subjects of the united kingdom. I again repeat, that I do lament that this subject has now been brought forward; I lament for the sake of the catholics themselves; I lament for the general interests of the country, that gentlemen have thought proper to agitate this subject at this moment. That gentlemen have a perfect right to exercise their judgment upon this subject I do not deny; I do not complain of their conduct; I only lament that they have felt it their duty to bring it forward at this period, and under the present circumstances; when, if they were to succeed, the consequences would not be such as we all desire, and if they fail, they may be such as we must all regret."

And now, Sir, let me ask the honourable gentleman, who has brought forward the present motion, and who fairly avows that his object is that every thing should be conceded to the catholics; let me ask the honourable gentlemen who support ed the motion last night with such a splendour of eloquence, what effect this is likely to produce upon the catholics themselves? When the honourable member, or the honourable mover of the question, talks of the effect of disappointing hope's that have been raised, I trust they have over-rated and exaggerated it. But one of these gentlemen did state, that amongst the possible causes of a religious feeling having mixed and operated in the late rebellion, might be enumerated the hope held out by Lord Fitzwilliam, that the claims of the catholics would be taken into consideration. They allege the disappointment of that hope as one of the causes that might have tended to produce the rebellion. If that be their conviction, what must they think who wish to go into a committee upon the petition, and yet are of opinion that they still reserve to themselves the freedom of rejecting it altogether, or of rejecting it in its most important parts? I submit this to the con

Mr. Grattan.

sideration of the house shortly, but distinctly; it rests upon grounds so obvious and so strong, that it will be taking up your time unnecessarily, to debate upon them. I submit this with a wish that the measure when brought forward will be carried with a general concurrence. But the circumstances which have hitherto rendered it impossible for me to urge and press it, make it impossible for me to urge and press it now; feeling as I do, that to press it and to fail, or to press it and even carry it with such a strong opposition, are alternatives, both of them so mischievous, that it will be difficult to decide between them. Seeing, Sir, what are the opinions of the times, what is the situa tion of men's minds, and the sentiments of all descriptions and classes, of the other branch of the legislature, and even the prevailing opinion of this house, I feel that I should act contrary to a sense of my duty, and even inconsistently with the original ground upon which I thought the measure ought to be brought forward, if I countenanced it under the present circumstances, or if I hesitated in giving my decided negative to the house going into a committee.

MR. Leycester, after adverting to a resolution passed by the house on the 13th instant, viz. "That his Majesty's Attorney-General be directed to prosecute Henry Lord Viscount Melville, for the several offences which appear from the report of the commissioners of naval inquiry, and that of the select committee of the House of Commons, to have been committed by the said Henry Lord Viscount Melville; and that the Attorney-General be directed to stay proceedings in the civil suit, instituted by order of the House against the said Henry Lord Viscount Melville;" and after urging, as a more eligible mode of proceeding, the adoption of a parliamentary impeachment, moved, "That the House proceed by impeachment against Henry Lord Viscount Melville for the several offences which appear, from the report of the commissioners of naval inquiry, and that of the select committee of the House of Commons,

to have been committed by the said Henry Lord Viscount Melville; and that the Attorney-General be directed to stay proceedings in the prosecution which he was directed by an order of this House, of the 13th of June, to insti tute against him."

Mr. PITT, in support of the motion, expressed his sentiments as follows:

Sir-From the arguments that have been urged against the motion of my honourable friend* behind me, it appears that the great ground of objection is, that the house cannot consistently rescind its own resolutions; there is something that puts it out of your power to attend to it. Now, Sir, to come at once to the examination of these arguments, there is one point which has been rested upon grounds contrary to the fact, I mean the notice. In adverting to that notice, I would desire gentlemen to attend to the dates. On Tuesday and Wednesday, the 11th and 12th, the original question was debated in the house, and it came to a vote on the morning of Thursday the 13th. On that day there was no house, and on Friday it sat again, and entered upon that discussion in which I was particularly concerned. In the next week there were only three sitting days before the right honourable gentleman behind me gave notice that he meant to apply to the house respecting some directions as to the matters referred to the attorney-general to prosecute. When this was proposed, I would ask the house whether I did not distinctly say that the more I considered the circumstances of the case, the more my attention had been directed to it, the more I thought, and the more I conversed upon it, I was the more convinced that an impeachment was a mode preferable to a criminal information. When the discussion took place on this subject, I ask whether it is not in the recollection of the house that I desired the honourable gentleman to put off his motion till this day, in order to have an opportunity of considering whether the impeachment might not be thought the most advisable manner of proceeding? This, indeed, went to such particularity, that I distinctly stated to him that he must be aware that we could not agree to give any fresh directions to the attorney-general relative to this prosecution, Mr. Leycester.

while we were of opinion that the mode of impeachment was preferable. I stated this with a view to assure the house that a motion was in contemplation for rescinding the resolution of the house for a criminal information, and substituting an impeachment, which the house, with a few exceptions, has already declared to be the mode most consistent with the privileges of the house of lords, and better calculated to attain the ends of pub. lic justice.

This, Sir, I have taken upon me to state to the house, in order to shew that if it has not been forewarned of the present motion, it is no fault of mine. It rests with gentlemen themselves to account for this subject having come upon them by surprise ;if, as they say, it has in fact come upon them in this manner. This I am sure of, that they had the fullest opportunity to know, that it was proposed to revise the resolution which was passed for a criminal information. How then do we stand? Why, five days ago a notice was in reality given, that this motion was to be submitted to the house. And under what circumstances was the notice given? Was it when there was reason to conclude that the house would be thinly attended? No. So far was this from being the case, that a notice stood in your books for an inquiry into the state of the army;-a subject which gentlemen have stated to be of the last importance, and which it might reasonably be presumed would command a full attendance of the house. What, then, becomes of the assertions of those who cry out against the proposition now before us, on the grounds that a great many members have gone into the country, who ought to be present at this discussion?

But this is not all. The house was in fact in possession of the notice on Thursday and Friday, at the moment when the house was engaged in discussing the vote of credit and other points connected with it, points of the last importance to the empire and even to Europe, and to which they attached so much consequence, that they proposed that parliament should sit all summer, in order to be ready to receive information concerning them. These were surely things that called for a full attendance of the house,

and there was a full attendance: Upon what ground then do they complain that they are taken by surprise? Upon a mature consideration of the case, I trust the house will be of opinion that this is a complaint without a foundation. Why, then, Sir, this is the situation in which we stood, and these are the circum. stances under which the notice, though not perhaps formally, was in reality given. If you are determined to insist upon the point of notice, let us see whether it ought to be considered as extremely necessary in this case from what has already passed upon it. [Cries of "Hear! hear!" from the other side.] Really, Sir, I should be glad to know what there is ridiculous in that? Do gentlemen mean to assert that no measure is to be carried without a specific notice long before? Let us look to what has been done on the resolution of impeachment. On the very day when that resolution was moved, an amendment for this criminal prosecution in the king's bench was proposed, without the smallest previous notice to the house to give gentlemen time to consider the point, without the smallest information that ought to be allowed in courtesy to the person accused, without any intimation that such a thing was to be brought forward; and this amendment was moved, too, as a matter of lenity to Lord Melville, I am not at all questioning the right of the house to adopt such a mode of proceeding; far from it; but I must at the same time be allowed to express my surprise, when I hear them loudly proclaiming that the proposition now submitted to their consideration is contrary. to parliamentary usage. With this example before us, can we admit the justice of these complaints? I am sure we cannot, if we pay any regard to our own proceedings on various occasions,

Now, Sir, having disposed of the short notice, about which we have heard so much, I come to another point on which no less stress has been laid. This is the monstrous inconsistency of re scinding a resolution of the house in the same session, and the. danger that would result from such a precedent. But what re solution is it proposed to rescind? Is it not true that we had rescinded a previous resolution of the house? A civil prosecution