saving, as compared with 1815, of 10,000l. In the present year, a very small saving had been made under this head, but circumstances had rendered it unnecessary to employ a greater number of consuls than we formerly did. If they added to the preceding sums of 31,6507. and 10,000l., a further saving of 22,8231. on different items connected with this branch of the service, it would give a total reduction of upwards of 64,000l. in the expense of a department which the hon. member alleged was always on the increase, and never on the decrease. He hoped he had said enough to show that there was not such a lavish expenditure as the hon. member had stated-such 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.

The honourable 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 honourable member to question the policy on which the government had acted. Taking that annus mirabilis of comparison, the year 1792, the honourable 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 chargé 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 allowances 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 honourable 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

the quintuple alliance. Could gentlemen see nothing in the change of circumstances which explained and enforced the necessity of sending an ambassador to Russia and to Austria? He should wish to know whether Russia had not taken a very different situation from that which she formerly maintained? He understood the meaning of the gentlemen 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-holy-alliance, 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 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 importance to England, and was, in size, four-fold 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 ex

traordinary. He had formerfy urged the necessity of sending a plenipotentiary to the Hans Towns; but, as the individual, who was then a chargé 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. Here the honourable member had fallen into an error very natural to him upon this subject, not knowing the peculiar circumstances of many of the missions. The honourable 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, 50,3601. The corresponding missions in the year 1802 were, including the change of rank, 74,000l. making an increase of 23,6401. This increase gave one-fourth more of salary on an average to the great diplomatic

officers

officers, and added about one-sixth to the whole expense. Nine minor missions, including Wirtemberg, in 1793, were 6,2957. and in 1822, 29,000l.; making an increase of 22,7051. 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 3,600l. and was now only 3,9001. so that in fact, after deducting 20 per cent. it was 601. 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 Wirtemberg? 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, Portugal, 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 diplomatic circle was more full than the court of the grand duke of Tuscany. It was a station which he trusted would ever be attended as a mission, and whatever different views might be entertained on the other side, he was in possession of information which proved, that this mission

could not be maintained with less expense.

He now came to a mission which the hon. gentleman dwelt upon with particular pressure, and he had no doubt that the hope of the honourable member would prove as illusory as many similar hopes entertained on that side: they only required the breath of a little discussion to destroy them. When he informed the house that Switzerland had very long had ministers from this country-when he stated the peculiarity of the relation, the connections of a moral nature, the mutual attachment of the people of each country, from similarity of character and political institutions, their extraordinary respect for each other; besides the propriety of having a mission there on dry political and military considerations, he denied that this country could withhold a minister from that country. It was at all times important for the preservation of the neutrality of the cantons of Switzerland, and for their protection from all the great powers of Europe, especially from France, that we should have a minister there. Switzerland was the great intervening country between Italy, France, and Germany, and was exposed to be disturbed by any disturbance in those countries. It was the key and bond which held them all together. them all together. It had, therefore, been one of those subjects which had 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 establish 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. Was that a proof that Switzerland was not of sufficient importance to be entitled to a mission from this country? There was a feeling in every country to hold that important connection 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 of gentlemen-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. 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. gent. would wish to hear the anecdotes, which would explain the cause of the interval in sending a successor to Mr. Canning. He (lord Londonderry) could indulge the appetite of the hon. gentleman if he were not afraid that this appetite would grow with the indulgence. If the honourable member were to ask him 20 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 honourable member, and which had persuaded him that the mission had been revived for a political 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 20 per cent. less against Mr. Wynn. Mr. Wynn had indeed a pension, but the arrangement could not be more advantageous for the public, than by selecting one who had a pension. Not that he (lord Londonderry) held himself bound always to select persons having pensions, but

how

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 3,9007. from which the pension of 1,500l. and 20 per cent. were to be deducted, and it was thus cut down nearly as low as the salary of Mr. Braun. He would now give the fair grounds of the increase of expenses for missions. Although the obligation to continue that increase might be evaded by granting a commission of inquiry, yet he should ill discharge his public duty, he should fail in 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 and inconvenience which added much to the expenses of our missions. The number of our countrymen abroad were so great, that his lordship, on his word, thought we formed a very great part of the population; as at Brussels and other places. With the true spirit of a modern stoic, the hon. gent. asked why should English gentlemen be received by the ambassadors? But he (lord Londonderry) doubted whether the hon. gent. if on the continent, would not hold the obligation rather high. The neglect of it would expose ambassadors to contempt and degradation, and they would be reviled and degraded from the station which they now held. 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 live and exercise their hospitality with dignity suited to their station.

Another cause of increased expense was more intimately connected with the public service: it was occasioned by the mode in which business was determined to be conducted. There was a regulation which charged ministers with certain expenses, when they were absent, for their private convenience. Formerly they could have been absent with all their emoluments, and the officers who supplied their place were paid by the public.

Now it was not so. A secretary of embassy, or a secretary of legation, according to the degree of the minister, was required to conduct the business,

and