purfuing measures in Ireland, not only injurious to the interefts of that kingdom, but fubverfive of all governments whatever. Thefe charges he could not take upon him to affert had been made by minifters themselves, but they had at least been connived at and countenanced, by having been acquiefced in and fuffered to pafs uncontradicted. The Noble Secretary of State had faid, that no charge had been brought against him, and that minifters had made their de clarations in Parliament merely in their own neceffary defence. Did the Noble Secretary of State really think, that the fudden recal of a Lord Lieutenant under fuch circumftances, circumftances fo deeply involving the tranquillity and order of the people of Ireland, and perhaps the fafety of that kingdom, amounted to no charge? Were minifters to be informed that they drew the indictment and preferred it against him before the grand jury of the Public, when they fent him his recal? They must have had ftrong grounds for fo ftrong a measure; they could not have recalled him from motives of perfonal diflike, because they would equally have operated against his appointment in the first instance; nor could he fuppofe that their conduct originated in trivial causes. If they could induce themselves to believe, or imagined they fhould be able to make the Public believe, that it was a matter. of flight importance, he flattered himself they would find themfelves mistaken. Having been arraigned on their indictment, he was anxious to come to trial. He felt his own honour implicated in the event at iffue between them, and he therefore implored his Majesty's minifters to do him that juftice which he had a right to expect, and by naming a day as early as poffible for inveftigation, afford the means of doing that which was certainly of no fmall importance, fet the public mind at rest upon a point refpecting which the public mind had undoubtedly been a good deal agitated. He hoped therefore, notwithstanding what had fallen from the Noble Secre tary of State, he would condefcend to name as early a day for the investigation, as the nature of public bufinefs would admit.

The Earl of Moira faid, he entirely agreed with the Noble Secretary of State, that the change or recal of a Viceroy of Ireland did not neceffarily implicate either the perfon removed, or those who advifed the change, in any blame; neither was it of itself either a fit or a neceflary ground for a Parliamentary proceeding; but in the cafe of the Noble Earl, who had that day called upon minifters to inftitute an inquiry in justice to his own honour, and in order to fatisfy the Public, it could by no means be confidered as a fimple recal of a Viceroy

It was connected with charges fo extenfive, and involved confiderations of fuch high importance, that it could not be dif pofed of fo eafily as the ordinary change of a Chief Governor of Ireland might be under other circumftances. It would not be proper for him to enter at large into a difcuffion of the fubject, conscious as he was that there was no question before the Houfe, nor did he mean to do it in the abfence of fo many Noble Lords, who, had they received notice that fo important a difcuffion was likely to take place, would certainly have attended their duty; but he must be allowed to fay that the recal of the Noble Earl had been fent in fo extraordinary a moment, in the midst of an arduous and difficult feffion of Parliament in Ireland, when meafures of the moft critical nature, which had met with popular applaufe throughout the kingdom, were in progrefs, that it must have occurred to the idea of every man, that either the Viceroyrecalled, had been guilty of fome grofs mifconduct in his high office, or that the ministers who advifed his recal, were themselves to blame. He did not pretend to point the blameto any particular quarter. If it ought to rest upon the Noble Earl, and that fhould fo appear upon inquiry, let it attach to him, and let due punishment follow: On the other hand, if it fhould turn out that it belonged to others, with them it ought to reft. But at any rate an investigation was neceffary to be inftituted; the fituation of Ireland in confequence of the recal was critical and dangerous, which made it indifpen fibly requifite, and, what was of perhaps nearly equal im portance, the public mind had been a good deal occupied and confiderably agitated on the occafion; every confideration therefore called for inquiry, and if his Majefty's minifters fhould still perfift in refufing either out of refpect to the Noble Earl's honour, or what was due to the feelings of public juftice, he thought the Noble Earl ought, from motives of refpect to both, to name a day himself, and make the motion. proper for that purpose.

The Duke of Norfolk owned himself not a little furprised at the manner in which this bufinefs had been treated by his Majefty's minifters. It was not for their Lordships at that moment to decide, whether the blame of the fudden recal of the late Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, under circumstances fo extraordinary, belonged to the Noble Earl or to minifters; but it muft fuggeft itself to the mind of every one of their Lordships that blame was due fomewhere. He had imagined that the moment the matter was mentioned in that House, his Majesty's minifters would have come fairly forward, and shewn themselves anxious for investigation by joining iffue with the

Noble

Noble Earl, and leaving it to the impartial judgment of their Lordships to pronounce who had been to blame. If he rightly understood the Noble Secretary of State, he had faid, that he had no charge to make against the Noble Earl, and defired no investigation; but if, unfortunately, the Noble Earl fhould perfift in calling for an inquiry, it would reft with him to propofe the day. It appeared therefore that there were two parties, rather delicately fituated. Both were deeply interested in the issue of the investigation, but neither chofe to inftitute it. One was defirous of inquiry, and called upon the other to bring it forward; the other faid, "No, we make no charge, nor defire any investigation; if you infift on it, name your day." In his humble opinion, the Duke faid, their Lordships were bound to recollect, that there was a third party of great importance, who had a right to be informed of the caufes and grounds of one of the most extraordinary political events that had occurred in modern times: That third party was the Public, in whofe behalf it was the indifpenfible duty of their Lordships to inftitute an inquiry. Under that impreffion, as an independent Peer of Parliament, he would refcue the two principal parties from their dilemma, by taking the matter out of their hands, and would at once fave their delicacy by moving that the Lords be fummoned for the first open day.

It being hinted that Thurfday was the firft open day,

His Grace named Thursday next, and defired their Lordfhips to confider what he had faid as a notice, that he would on that day move for a Committee of Inquiry, on the subject of the late fudden recal of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.

HAIR-POWDER.

Lord Mulgrave, as foon as the order was made for the third reading of the Bill impofing a tax on Hair-Powder, for Tuefday next, faid, that though the Bill was deferred, he hoped the delay would not be urged against the claufe he intended to propofe in favour of half-pay officers, as an argument on the ground of additional time that it would neceffarily take before a new Bill fhould receive the royal affent, fuppofing that the other House of Parliament (if the claufe met with the reception of the Houfe) fhould throw out the Bill, and bring in

a new one.

HOUSE

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

FRIDAY, April 24.

PRICE OF PROVISIONS.

Mr. Erskine prefented a petition from the Mayor and Inhabitants of Portsmouth, claiming the attention of the House to the prefent high price of provifions. The petition stated, that the prefent high price of provifions was attended with great diftrefs to the lower claffes, and had a tendency to excite public difcontent; and prayed that the Houfe might adopt fuch measures as to their wifdom fhould feem meet, in order to remedy the evil, and prevent the tumult which it might otherwife occafion.-The petition was ordered to lie on the table.

MR. GRENVILLE'S ELECTION COMMittee bill.

The Order of the Day was read for the Houfe to go into a Committee upon the Bill to regulate the law with refpect to ballots in cafes of controverted elections.

Mr. Fox objected to the claufe diminishing the number of Members required to be prefent, before the Houfe can proceed to ballot. Of the reduction of the number of Members from 100 to 60 he decidedly difapproved. He rather wifhed, if any alteration took place, that the number should be increased from too to 200. It had been a complaint, and a very just one, that the trial of elections had hitherto been in too few hands. The propofed reduction, however, would put the trial of elections into fewer hands, and it might then be fairly apprehended that the greater number of Members who would try controverted elections, would be in the intereft of the Executive Government. There was alfo another point to which he wifhed more particularly to call the attention of the Committee, viz. that a number of Election Committees fhould be appointed on one day; and this might eafily be effected if the Houfe would compel the attendance of Members.

Mr. Thomas Grenville confefled, that the reduction which he had originally propofed, of the number of Members neceffary to form a ballot, was too fmall. After fome difcuffion with feveral Members, he had been convinced that fixty was too low a number, and he therefore meant to propose that the number should be 75. Seventy-five was a larger proportion to 11 (the number of Members which he meant to propose fhould compofe the Committee), than 100 to 15, the prefent amount of the Members compofing Committees.

Vol. III.

L

Mr.

Mr. Fox faid, that he did not object that the proportion of 75 was not great enough to the number of 11 Members propofed to be chofen, but that it was not great enough to 558 Members of the Houfe, whofe duty it was to attend on fuch occafions. Out of the whole number it furely was not unreasonable to compel the attendance of 100. He thought that there was a very great objection to the decifion of cafes of controverted elections falling into the hands of a few Members.

Mr, Francis faid, that he fhould confider it as difgraceful to the Houfe, if, when Members were found to neglect their duty, instead of feeking to provide a remedy for the inconvenience, they should be intent only, under the fhape of a regulation, to introduce an apology for their own remiffness.

Mr. Sylvefter Douglas thought, that the numbers ought not to be reduced below 100-as 75 however approached nearer to 100 than 60, he should agree to it.

Mr. Powys conceived, that compulfory remedies fhould not be reforted to in ordinary cafes.

Mr. Huffey obferved, that this was an ordinary cafe.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer wifhed to preferve the great principles of Mr. Grenville's Act; an Act of which every Member had experienced the good effects. At the fame time he wifhed to confult the convenience of Members, if their convenience did not militate against the advantages of that Act. He concurred in opinion with Mr. Fox, that it would be proper to ppoint as many Election Committees in one day as poffible; and in order to procure fo many Committees, he would confent to the reduction of the original number below ico. The mode of producing an attendance ought, in his opinion, to be compulfory, particularly after a general election.

The Speaker faid, that the Bill had two objects in view; the one was, to appoint a proper tribunal to try elections; the other, to prevent that delay which had hitherto fo difgraced the Houfe. He was perfuaded, that a compulsory mode of producing an attendaifce, would be found to be neceflary. He preferred the original number of 100 to 75.

Mr. Fox, alluding to the argument of convenience, said, that if by convenience were meant that Gentlemen should not be detained five hours, when the bufinefs might be difpatched in one, he thould certainly vote for any measure that tended to produce that effect; but if it meant that 75 Members would be a better number than 300, because attendance upon elections was a part of their duty which Members did not like to difcharge, he certainly fhould not fupport fuch convenience.